Girls HS Hockey in Major Decline

[Bandy]

Jumping in late here...

My daughters had great experiences in HS hockey. At relatively blue-collar suburban public high school, not the cake-eater public or private schools. Yes, things do really tail off in exurbs & rural parts of the state. The focus should be on whether your girls can have a rewarding hockey experience, not whether all parts of the state and all demographics can challenge for the State Tourney. Few teams will make it.

Totally agree that youth girls tournaments should not conflict with the H.S. Tourney. MN HOCKEY -- PLEASE FIX THAT RIDICULOUS SITUATION.

I also think that the move to U15 teams (vs. U14, which is what we had up until now) is a direct attack on H.S. programs by MN Hockey, probably driven by some warped perspective that the girls need to be coached by dads as long as possible, and play as many games as possible.

In the old days, it was practically a given that U14 teams would be dominated by 8th graders, with the 9th graders playing H.S. Now, U15 seems to be tapping some JV programs. Not sure that's for the good. I respect families to make their own decisions, but I know in our case my daughter was SO HAPPY to be coached by non-parent coaches. Other up-sides too (like being able to go to hockey practice right after school gets out, instead of 9:10pm).

The families willing to (or crazy enough to) pursue hockey year-round have plenty of options outside of the H.S. season, so who cares if they get to play more games at U15 than MSHSL?

[maristar]

Enrollment
Entity 2006 2015 Change %
USAH 442,077 533,172 +91,095 +20.6%
USAH Males 387,915 463,428 +75,513 +19.5%
USAH Female 54,162 69,744 +15,582 +28.8%
MN Hockey 46,447 55,450 +9,003 +19.4%
MN Males 36,584 42,642 +6,058 +16.6%
MN Females 9,863 12,808 +2,945 +29.9%
Maine Total 6,098 6,440 +342 +5.6%
Maine Boys 4,852 5,351 +499 +10.3%
Maine Females 1,246 1,089 -157 -12.6%


Not sure of the correlation of youth to HS, but the numbers over the past ten years show an increase in all but Maine's female enrollment.

Either TGO99 is pulling our chain or he/she is not too bright. I have my opinion on which one it is...

If you believe what people say instead of facts, Obama and Dayton said that health care was going to be less expensive under ACA and MNsure also!

[thegreatone99]

DarkStar- I appreciate your global numbers and I guess the Pioneer Press is lying when they write this? Your rose colored glasses shows 30% growth, then it must be true, 30% growth it is and everything is going perfect. We will actually see Irondale expand and in two years no longer need to be a co-op, same with Coon Rapids. Based on your numbers, the HS League should see at least 5 new programs in the coming years, and no more co-ops.

I do find it funny when you simply cut and past actual articles and facts, you continue to ignore and twist the argument. And the only acknowledgment is for Maine.

If you really think you should continue to have a system that allows a Tournament to be dominated by a select few schools, more power to you.

The uproar against St. Thomas for years that they should move up is no different here, except now it could be 2 -3 programs that could easily move up and compete at Class AA. Or is it all about the trophy case and the X?

HOCKEY SLIPPING - Oct 15, Pioneer Press

The phrase “Minnesota — State of Hockey” is OK as a chamber of commerce slogan. But it’s not exactly accurate any longer. In the past 10 years, participation in girls hockey has dropped by 7 percent, and it’s dropped by 12 percent in boys hockey. Hockey is now tied with swimming, with about 9,600 boys and girls in each sport.

[pepperpot]

I love the nahnahnah from nevertoomuchbarf. It shows how classless some of these private school parents are. Masala, numbers are dropping. Why argue? Why do you think there are more coops every year? Because there are more girls coming up at the highschool level? No because numbers are dropping and there aren't enough girls to field a team. When my boys played Duluth had two girls teams. Coops were for small schools not schools like Coon Rapids or Duluth. Having powerhouse programs like the blakes and brecks of the world do nothing to counter the idea that hockey is too expensive to play. I think anyone who defends them not moving up is an idiot. Putting a team like St Paul united in a section with little or no competition is even more idiotic. Recruiting, unlimited budgets, relationships with elite summer programs, yeah the haves have it this time. Funny thing is eventually it won't mean anything because the teams that made the state of hockey great won't have a horse in the race anymore. Then they can feel good knowing they've stepped on the little gals and made it a one horse race.

[thegreatone99]

I love the nahnahnah from nevertoomuchbarf. It shows how classless some of these private school parents are. Masala, numbers are dropping. Why argue? Why do you think there are more coops every year? Because there are more girls coming up at the highschool level? No because numbers are dropping and there aren't enough girls to field a team. When my boys played Duluth had two girls teams. Coops were for small schools not schools like Coon Rapids or Duluth. Having powerhouse programs like the blakes and brecks of the world do nothing to counter the idea that hockey is too expensive to play. I think anyone who defends them not moving up is an idiot. Putting a team like St Paul united in a section with little or no competition is even more idiotic. Recruiting, unlimited budgets, relationships with elite summer programs, yeah the haves have it this time. Funny thing is eventually it won't mean anything because the teams that made the state of hockey great won't have a horse in the race anymore. Then they can feel good knowing they've stepped on the little gals and made it a one horse race.

Perfectly stated, and based on facts and reality

[itsfoilcoach]

In Minnesota, the sports our kids play are changing – fast

HOCKEY SLIPPING - Oct 15, Pioneer Press

The phrase “Minnesota — State of Hockey” is OK as a chamber of commerce slogan. But it’s not exactly accurate any longer. In the past 10 years, participation in girls hockey has dropped by 7 percent, and it’s dropped by 12 percent in boys hockey. Hockey is now tied with swimming, with about 9,600 boys and girls in each sport.

One reason hockey suffers is its high costs, said Laura Ranum, St. Paul Public Schools’ athletic department specialist and a mother of four boys.

“For something like cross country, the cost is a pair of tennis shoes. Look at swimming — not a whole lot of equipment there,” Ranum said. “Then you have hockey, with all the equipment and the ice time.”

Although “Minnesota — State of Track and Field” might not be a slogan that excites the blood, it reflects reality here.

In fairness it isn't called the State of Hockey because the number of kids who play hockey as to those who play other sports. It's called that because of the numbers who play compared to other states.

When you look at you have a U18 national team with 16 kids from Minnesota and no other state having more the 1 player I think our State of Hockey name is safe for a while.

Thank you allhoc. Thank you.

I love how you start with "in fairness" when you are debating a guy who is arguing that girls hockey (not all MN hockey mind you. Just HS girls) is the antithesis of "fair" and money not talent buys success and opportunity. Over it

Waytomuchof nevertomuch westsiderhockey rederic.

Apparently calling out certain issue with you always leads to the victim argument. It cheap. and simple minded. But being that you seem to be on the outside looking in on this discussion you revert to sarcasm, and a know all elitist atitude that kinda proves most of the people's view points here...and discredits yours. I could name a few girls over the years that have been looked at just because they are in the right school. Some never played, others were succseful when they went onto collage. It's up to us as parents to take advantage of all opertunities when they come. But a person like yourself acts like it's all about 10 years of training/camps and that gets the kids all the opertunities they need. Yup that's it. I'm thinking you should head over to the basketball boards their looking for a scholar like yourself. That's a small part of what needs to be done. Surrounding yourself with good athletes always improves your chances to be looked at. Having a good hockey network helps, along with grades, talent, volunteer work, so on and so forth. Again, what ever it takes to get looked at in my book. But don't sit there writing your misguided perceptions, and insulting people with your so called humor because they have an opinion on something you can't understand, or agree with. No victims here. They are just calling out a system that is slightly broke, and I think everyone can agree it needs to be tweeked a little. My kids have all been successful in this sport because they had a solid drive to succeed, and a hell of a work ethic in school. But here is some advice if your tuition goes up next year. Try public education next time. - Edina is ranked in the top 50 schools in the nation. So you don't have to go to a private for a good education...unless you've been scouted for hockey which never happens I hear. I'm thinking this sounds good for you...nevertomuchbasketball. Just saying.

Signed,

The victims

My apologies in advance for being a little harsh here.

[Nevertoomuchhockey]

I was actually giving you a compliment on that comment, and pointing out that you were attempting a "fair" debate with someone who wasn't concerned about fairness, only persecution.

My kids have been in public schools in the north metro from k-8 and k-6. Our local public was faltering in ways completely unrelated to hockey. I've never dismissed public schools or academics or athletics outright. Each is unique, as is each private.

I actually don't care much about the opinions of posters like go99 and pp. None of us or our kids are entitled to anything in life and the highs and lows of high school sports matter so little in the long run except in regards to the character building, team work, and work ethic they can create - all of which last a lot longer than any trophy or tv appearance.

[thegreatone99]

Breaking News - Amanda Kessel


is back and will be suiting up and getting ready to play for any team that ends up playing Breck or Blake in sections.

Oops I just woke up from a dream, wishful thinking she was recruited for the smaller Class A teams to make things fair.

I guess it's for the Gophers vs Fighting Hawks this weekend. Good for her, nice to see her overcome her concussions and finish off her great career.

[itsfoilcoach]

I was actually giving you a compliment on that comment, and pointing out that you were attempting a "fair" debate with someone who wasn't concerned about fairness, only persecution.

My kids have been in public schools in the north metro from k-8 and k-6. Our local public was faltering in ways completely unrelated to hockey. I've never dismissed public schools or academics or athletics outright. Each is unique, as is each private.

I actually don't care much about the opinions of posters like go99 and pp. None of us or our kids are entitled to anything in life and the highs and lows of high school sports matter so little in the long run except in regards to the character building, team work, and work ethic they can create - all of which last a lot longer than any trophy or tv appearance.

Dang it nevertomuchhockey. You had to take the high road. Now I feel like a jerk. Plus the worse part about it is I liked your post.

[massalsa]

i will probably get flamed for lots of this but here goes:

I see 2 major themes here:

1. The Privates playing in the "A" tournament.
2. Youth hockey is dying.

1a. Blake/Breck/SPU (all privates) should not be allowed to play in the "A" hockey state tourney.

I think that lots of people agree with that statement. Complain all you want but until school administrators or AD's (or MSHSL) change that we are stuck with the current situation.

1b. The fact that these privates are playing in the state tournament lowers the #s of girls playing hockey as a result of teams in their section not making the state tourney. Or the teams that make it from any other district (other than the SPU district) don't have a chance to win and therefore have less girls playing hockey?!?

I dont agree with this premise. I have no idea but did TRF's overall hockey #s go up as a result of their "A" championship? (not according to someone's #s on here from somewhere they went down 6 players on the girls side from 2014-2015).



2. Youth/Girls hockey is dying.

I believe that people have a bunch of reasons for their kids to NOT play organized hockey. Many of them I used until my kid told her parents that she WANTED to play hockey as a 10 year old. We decided to give it a chance...she LOVED it and wanted more (despite being the worst player on her team almost the entire first year)

Some of the reasons for me. Crappy ice outdoors when learning how to skate. Not wanting to spend $600+ on hotels every season for Ashley/Chloe/Amanda/Precious to play in 2 U10A/B tournaments in all corners of the state. Seeing the parents after the kids skate at 7 am on a saturday am or seeing the kids the next am after a 9:00-10:00 pm school night skate. Seeing how crazy/delusional lots of hockey parents are. Etc.

There are have's and have not's in every sport. Traveling soccer can be about $1000-$2000+ a year + travel costs for tourneys. Baseball is not too expensive until kids get older or play "travel" and then need to travel more or have more specialized coaches and other expenses. Downhill skiing...expensive. Club volleyball...expensive. Basketball...expensive at higher levels. All sports have both haves/have nots and expenses except cross country and track & field (even youth football is not cheap...). Its NOT just hockey!

If you believe that privates recruit then look around at the entire world...the WORLD RECRUITS!!! Come to our church, come work for our company, come live in our neighborhood, come play on our work softball team, come do this and come do that! Most humans want to be with other humans that are good at stuff and/or easy to be around. Go around the metro or state and you will find privates and publics that "recruit" in a variety of sports and academics. What school does NOT want kids that are good at things? Or are "good" kids? Or just want their $$$. There are kids that are bussed ALL over the place for school (see the # of kids that open enroll OUT of Minneapolis). Many of these first/second ring suburbs recruit $tudent$ from other districts.

[thegreatone99]

i will probably get flamed for lots of this but here goes:

I see 2 major themes here:

1. The Privates playing in the "A" tournament.
2. Youth hockey is dying.

1a. Blake/Breck/SPU (all privates) should not be allowed to play in the "A" hockey state tourney.

I think that lots of people agree with that statement. Complain all you want but until school administrators or AD's (or MSHSL) change that we are stuck with the current situation.

1b. The fact that these privates are playing in the state tournament lowers the #s of girls playing hockey as a result of teams in their section not making the state tourney. Or the teams that make it from any other district (other than the SPU district) don't have a chance to win and therefore have less girls playing hockey?!?

I dont agree with this premise. I have no idea but did TRF's overall hockey #s go up as a result of their "A" championship? (not according to someone's #s on here from somewhere they went down 6 players on the girls side from 2014-2015).



2. Youth/Girls hockey is dying.

I believe that people have a bunch of reasons for their kids to NOT play organized hockey. Many of them I used until my kid told her parents that she WANTED to play hockey as a 10 year old. We decided to give it a chance...she LOVED it and wanted more (despite being the worst player on her team almost the entire first year)

Some of the reasons for me. Crappy ice outdoors when learning how to skate. Not wanting to spend $600+ on hotels every season for Ashley/Chloe/Amanda/Precious to play in 2 U10A/B tournaments in all corners of the state. Seeing the parents after the kids skate at 7 am on a saturday am or seeing the kids the next am after a 9:00-10:00 pm school night skate. Seeing how crazy/delusional lots of hockey parents are. Etc.

There are have's and have not's in every sport. Traveling soccer can be about $1000-$2000+ a year + travel costs for tourneys. Baseball is not too expensive until kids get older or play "travel" and then need to travel more or have more specialized coaches and other expenses. Downhill skiing...expensive. Club volleyball...expensive. Basketball...expensive at higher levels. All sports have both haves/have nots and expenses except cross country and track & field (even youth football is not cheap...). Its NOT just hockey!

If you believe that privates recruit then look around at the entire world...the WORLD RECRUITS!!! Come to our church, come work for our company, come live in our neighborhood, come play on our work softball team, come do this and come do that! Most humans want to be with other humans that are good at stuff and/or easy to be around. Go around the metro or state and you will find privates and publics that "recruit" in a variety of sports and academics. What school does NOT want kids that are good at things? Or are "good" kids? Or just want their $$$. There are kids that are bussed ALL over the place for school (see the # of kids that open enroll OUT of Minneapolis). Many of these first/second ring suburbs recruit $tudent$ from other districts.

Well said

[Bandy]

... No because numbers are dropping and there aren't enough girls to field a team....

So, if MN Hockey enrollment is up, and MN HS hockey is shrinking, what's driving the trends?

[jg2112]

... No because numbers are dropping and there aren't enough girls to field a team....

So, if MN Hockey enrollment is up, and MN HS hockey is shrinking, what's driving the trends?

Look at it this way:

If Edina and (say) Andover grow their girls' program by 100% over a 10 year period, they each still only have one high school team.

If Coon Rapids' girls program decreases by 30% to the point where they need to co-op at the youth and high school levels, well....it's not hard to see how the gains in Edina and Andover offset the losses in Coon Rapids. Plus, we've gone from 4 HS teams to 3.

[sinbin]

... No because numbers are dropping and there aren't enough girls to field a team....

So, if MN Hockey enrollment is up, and MN HS hockey is shrinking, what's driving the trends?

Look at it this way:

If Edina and (say) Andover grow their girls' program by 100% over a 10 year period, they each still only have one high school team.

If Coon Rapids' girls program decreases by 30% to the point where they need to co-op at the youth and high school levels, well....it's not hard to see how the gains in Edina and Andover offset the losses in Coon Rapids. Plus, we've gone from 4 HS teams to 3.

Someone using math (and logic) here - love it!

[thegreatone99]

Shots 52-12, score 8-0, Breck playing Class A..... priceless!!!!!

[zooomx]

I will chime in here. I passed this on to MN Hockey a few week back too.

The problem with HS and Youth Girls Hockey is apathy around the state.

The solution is pretty easy. If a youth association has 3-4 teams at every level, there is absolutely no reason they can't have 2 girls teams at every level. If they don't, they are not trying. Too many associations are boy-centric. If you have 3-4 boys teams, then there is a) enough money in the area to support a good girls program and b) there is enough hockey passion in the area to support a good girls program. No excuses. No co-ops should be allowed. Mn Hockey and District Directors need to clamp down on this. There is no reason we should see a co-op of Anoka/Rogers... what a joke.
Co-ops like this should have a sunset date placed upon them.

If a high school is fed by an association that has 3-4 teams at every level of youth boys hockey, then there is no reason to have to co-op at the high school level. If you dont have enough players, you are not helping to grow girls hockey at the youth level... you arent even trying.

Alexandria, East Grand Forks, Thief River Falls, Roseau, Warroad, Red Wing etc all have strong girls programs. Why does MN Hockey and MSHSL let other organizations with the capacity to have strong girls programs off the hook by letting them co-op? The easy short term solution hurts girls hockey in the long run. Take the hard road and grow your freaking program!

Co-ops only make sense when a community does not have the economic capacity, nor the passion for hockey to support a strong boys program.

It's really that simple. If you have a strong boys program and a weak girls program, you are not trying.

And...those complaining of the privates. Stop. It is really sweet when you knock one of them off in the state tournament. If you win a state tournament without a challenging path to the top, is it really that rewarding? It's their choice to stay down at A. Publics have knocked them out here and there and it makes it even more rewarding when they do. Just sounds like sour grapes to me. Should we create 3-4 classes of hockey so everyone has a better chance to win state? Winning state for a small town SHOULD be a monumental accomplishment. You SHOULD have to have a special team exerting special effort to win it all.

[maristar]

I will chime in here. I passed this on to MN Hockey a few week back too.

The problem with HS and Youth Girls Hockey is apathy around the state.

The solution is pretty easy. If a youth association has 3-4 teams at every level, there is absolutely no reason they can't have 2 girls teams at every level. If they don't, they are not trying. Too many associations are boy-centric. If you have 3-4 boys teams, then there is a) enough money in the area to support a good girls program and b) there is enough hockey passion in the area to support a good girls program. No excuses. No co-ops should be allowed. Mn Hockey and District Directors need to clamp down on this. There is no reason we should see a co-op of Anoka/Rogers... what a joke.
Co-ops like this should have a sunset date placed upon them.

If a high school is fed by an association that has 3-4 teams at every level of youth boys hockey, then there is no reason to have to co-op at the high school level. If you dont have enough players, you are not helping to grow girls hockey at the youth level... you arent even trying.

Alexandria, East Grand Forks, Thief River Falls, Roseau, Warroad, Red Wing etc all have strong girls programs. Why does MN Hockey and MSHSL let other organizations with the capacity to have strong girls programs off the hook by letting them co-op? The easy short term solution hurts girls hockey in the long run. Take the hard road and grow your freaking program!

Co-ops only make sense when a community does not have the economic capacity, nor the passion for hockey to support a strong boys program.

It's really that simple. If you have a strong boys program and a weak girls program, you are not trying.

And...those complaining of the privates. Stop. It is really sweet when you knock one of them off in the state tournament. If you win a state tournament without a challenging path to the top, is it really that rewarding? It's their choice to stay down at A. Publics have knocked them out here and there and it makes it even more rewarding when they do. Just sounds like sour grapes to me. Should we create 3-4 classes of hockey so everyone has a better chance to win state? Winning state for a small town SHOULD be a monumental accomplishment. You SHOULD have to have a special team exerting special effort to win it all.

Well said! Also, take their phones away from them and make them skate a couple hours a day too! Too many parents are crying the blues about participation because the kids are too lazy to play. It takes effort, drive and some tough days. The parents complaining are the ones causing the problem. "Suzie, you can never compete against the B & B of the world, so don't even try". Entitlement starts with hard work and effort, funny how that works.

[itsfoilcoach]

I will chime in here. I passed this on to MN Hockey a few week back too.

The problem with HS and Youth Girls Hockey is apathy around the state.

The solution is pretty easy. If a youth association has 3-4 teams at every level, there is absolutely no reason they can't have 2 girls teams at every level. If they don't, they are not trying. Too many associations are boy-centric. If you have 3-4 boys teams, then there is a) enough money in the area to support a good girls program and b) there is enough hockey passion in the area to support a good girls program. No excuses. No co-ops should be allowed. Mn Hockey and District Directors need to clamp down on this. There is no reason we should see a co-op of Anoka/Rogers... what a joke.
Co-ops like this should have a sunset date placed upon them.

If a high school is fed by an association that has 3-4 teams at every level of youth boys hockey, then there is no reason to have to co-op at the high school level. If you dont have enough players, you are not helping to grow girls hockey at the youth level... you arent even trying.

Alexandria, East Grand Forks, Thief River Falls, Roseau, Warroad, Red Wing etc all have strong girls programs. Why does MN Hockey and MSHSL let other organizations with the capacity to have strong girls programs off the hook by letting them co-op? The easy short term solution hurts girls hockey in the long run. Take the hard road and grow your freaking program!

Co-ops only make sense when a community does not have the economic capacity, nor the passion for hockey to support a strong boys program.

It's really that simple. If you have a strong boys program and a weak girls program, you are not trying.

And...those complaining of the privates. Stop. It is really sweet when you knock one of them off in the state tournament. If you win a state tournament without a challenging path to the top, is it really that rewarding? It's their choice to stay down at A. Publics have knocked them out here and there and it makes it even more rewarding when they do. Just sounds like sour grapes to me. Should we create 3-4 classes of hockey so everyone has a better chance to win state? Winning state for a small town SHOULD be a monumental accomplishment. You SHOULD have to have a special team exerting special effort to win it all.

I'm sure some of these programs do co-op as a matter on convenience. But I would also assume that more are doing it out of necessity. I agree though, this type of answer for the associations does hurt the numbers because there is no reason to try and spur interest any more, they got there team.

But we can't stop picking on privates, it's too fun. Say, I have an idea! We should go back to a single bracket tournament. I would love to see Laverne, Windom, or Marshall town run the board on the likes of Edina, Blake, Breck. Now that would be "special". I got another good idea. In collage, I think they should do away with Division I, Division II and Division III schools. Now I would pay big bucks to see the Wisconsin Badgers take on Gustavis or Bethal. Now that would be a monumental accomplishment. But hey, theres more. All sports should follow this new " special" format. Take away weight classes in boxing and wrestling . Now that would be awesome to see a light weight win a heavy weight belt. I mean if that light weight beat that heavy weight, I bet he really earned it ... Well I would actually pay to see that one. There is very good reasons why these classes are put into place. It's not about giving away the road to victory, and not being able to earn it. (though privates use it for that) The privates are exploiting the system by not doing the right thing here. Maybe the UofM should drop down. If the private ran the NCAA they would. You need classification to spur competion, safety, personal growth at a level that makes sense for the individuals, as well as the program, and a whole gamut of other reasons. We have enough to complian about with the high school league. We need to put the blam on where it belongs. The privates (ADs) then the MSHSL for not making a phone call at the very least to ask the question. They both know of the issue, and they both want to ignore it. One gets increased tuition, and the other who knows why. You started strong, but you lost me at the end of your post.

[pepperpot]

Foil is right on. The only idiots who defend the privates staying down are the ones who send their kids to privates. Spare us the satisfying challenge BS as well as the idea public schools recruit. There is a difference between a Warroad recruiting and Blake recruiting and everyone knows it. A team like Alexandria, or Rochester or Cloquet doesn't recruit to all corners of the state. They don't pick off the top players from Edina, Minnetonka or Wayzata. They don't have fuzzy budgets that pay the tuition of the poor income stud players they recruit. It's complete nonsense and everyone knows it. Even the playing field and the small schools will compete and maybe you'll stop the decline in numbers. Good luck to all the small schools. You'll need it if you make it because odds are one of the privates will be standing in your way with their rainbow team. You'll need luck finding parking too because they'll be taking up two parking spots with their white suburban that has a bumpersticker that says we're privileged, entitled and proud.

[thegreatone99]

"Well said! Also, take their phones away from them and make them skate a couple hours a day too! Too many parents are crying the blues about participation because the kids are too lazy to play. It takes effort, drive and some tough days. The parents complaining are the ones causing the problem. "Suzie, you can never compete against the B & B of the world, so don't even try". Entitlement starts with hard work and effort, funny how that works."


So the girls at Chisago Lakes are lazy, they don't work as hard as the girls at Breck, that is why they lost 8-0. Same thing with Hibbing, all these small communities are full of players who do not work hard and are lazy, only the B & B girls work hard and why they are so much better - Did Suzie just say all this - priceless.

[Nevertoomuchhockey]

Your private vs public debate is diluted a bit with the Breck vs Chisago example. CL was beat up pretty consistently all season by publics with score and shot discrepancies just as big or bigger as this single play off game. Just sayin'.
Who's Suzy?

[thegreatone99]

Your private vs public debate is diluted a bit with the Breck vs Chisago example. CL was beat up pretty consistently all season by publics with score and shot discrepancies just as big or bigger as this single play off game. Just sayin'.
Who's Suzy?

Not sure, seems Darkstar has a girls team all made up with hard working girls named Suzi

[thegreatone99]

of the 19 games played yesterday 78% or 15/19 games were won by 3+ goals

only one game .05% 1/19 was a one goal game.

I guess I am wrong, there is tremendous balance within the state and no "haves and have nots" don't change anything, these numbers show tremendous growth and progress

I apologize for all the misrepresentation of facts

[jg2112]

of the 19 games played yesterday 78% or 15/19 games were won by 3+ goals

only one game .05% 1/19 was a one goal game.

I guess I am wrong, there is tremendous balance within the state and no "haves and have nots" don't change anything, these numbers show tremendous growth and progress

I apologize for all the misrepresentation of facts

Let's bookmark this and compare it to the first couple days of sections for the boys.

Have a look at FBS football. If they held a mythical 96 team tournament and, say, Alabama was told to play Kansas in a first round matchup, we wouldn't be discussing the sustainability of college football.

Heck, #14 Michigan beat #19 Florida by 34 points in the Citrus Bowl. Is that indicative of anything other than Michigan was better than Florida on 1/1/2016?

It just so happens that in a given year some teams are very good and some teams stink.

I won't deny that there are certain fundamental issues exist that could improve for womens' hockey, but I don't think the first round of sections is the place where that would be borne out.

[Sparlimb]

Don't hold your breath great one. Privates will clean up again in both A and AA. That article in Mpls about Richfield spells it all out. The girls game is dying and the state is watching it happen. More coops means more team dying. Evenetually it will be the wealthy suburbs and the privates. Force the Blakes, Brecks, Uniteds Benildes to move up. They can petition to move down if their recruiter took a leave of absence.

Hill-Murray and Benilde deserve kudos for already moving up. All other private schools should do the same.

While Benilde was in the championship 2 years ago, they have fallen mightily. HM will be a top 10 team next year, but no where near this year. This is likely the high point for them for the next number of years (going undefeated is the high point for anyone). So my guess is public schools will take back the title in 2017. Blake and Breck are a tough case. I'm not sure why they enjoy dominating at A (much like STA in boys did for so long). Blake could easily win the AA title this year (that with an undefeated AA team out there). If you are going to make the argument to leave private schools in with the public ones (which I think we should), it's best the private schools play the top level they can without getting hurt.