HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Shinbone_News wrote:Personally, I'd like to see MN Hockey play both ways by simply changing the effing age groups, and the MSHL getting their heads out of their breezers.

So it mainly boils down to not wanting 9th graders that are past Bantams, right?

O-townClown wrote:

Shinbone_News wrote:Personally, I'd like to see MN Hockey play both ways by simply changing the effing age groups, and the MSHL getting their heads out of their breezers.

So it mainly boils down to not wanting 9th graders that are past Bantams, right?

Well, yeah right -- more complicated than it might appear. But why not sync the MSHSL up with Tier 1, and have Varsity be U18 and JV can be U16? Probably a lot more complicated than that.

Tier 1 U18 is already dominated by private high schools mostly in Chicago, Detroit and MA.

This also begs the question of why our Junior Gold teams don't go to nationals. Maybe they do???

Shinbone_News wrote:

O-townClown wrote:

Shinbone_News wrote:Personally, I'd like to see MN Hockey play both ways by simply changing the effing age groups, and the MSHL getting their heads out of their breezers.

So it mainly boils down to not wanting 9th graders that are past Bantams, right?

Well, yeah right -- more complicated than it might appear. But why not sync the MSHSL up with Tier 1, and have Varsity be U18 and JV can be U16? Probably a lot more complicated than that.

Tier 1 U18 is already dominated by private high schools mostly in Chicago, Detroit and MA.

This also begs the question of why our Junior Gold teams don't go to nationals. Maybe they do???

High schools in tier 1? Not really, other than prep schools like SSM and Culver. The Chicago and Detriot dominant T1 teams are club teams with no affiliation to any highschool. Highschool hockey in IL and MI is a joke.

Shinbone_News wrote:

Section 8 guy wrote:

SKMN wrote:Would you rather play for your HS team, or play for MN against the rest of the country for the National Championship? Play in the World Pee Wee championships in Quebec against the world, or on the local association team?

I don't know. I wonder what Herb Brooks or Neal Broten would say?

Plenty of kids would say they'd rather play with their childhood friends on a HS team that makes it to State. Anybody who's been to nationals versus the State tourney knows that State is by far a bigger deal in terms of spectators, media attention, etc. And as BSM and STA have proven against SSM this year, not to mention Edina PWAA against Detroit's finest, there's a strong case to be made that State actually meets and maybe even exceeds Nationals in terms of the quality of play.

Personally, I'd like to see MN Hockey play both ways by simply changing the effing age groups, and the MSHL getting their heads out of their breezers.

The part about the MN State tourney having more spectators and more media I absolutely agree with. Anyone who has been to a MN state tournament knows it is quite a spectacle and quite something to go watch....

However, your other statement is nt grounded in reality. BSM and STA showed that two private schools who have managed to recruit some of the state of Minnesota's very best talent are able to skate at the Tier 1 AAA level this year and do well (that has not been the case in some recent previous seasons). Edina's PWAA team also showed that this year the largest AA association in MN can field a PWAA team that can compete with the very best out there in AAA land. However, those examples do not represent the state as a whole, so to say the state tournament represents a level of overall competition that is on par with AAA National Tournaments is a bit of a stretch IMHO, there is a team or two but overall top to bottom.... I do not believe that to be an accurate statement

SnowedIn wrote: High schools in tier 1? Not really, other than prep schools like SSM and Culver. The Chicago and Detriot dominant T1 teams are club teams with no affiliation to any highschool. Highschool hockey in IL and MI is a joke.

Correct. I was thinking of the prep league. Seems like lots of opportunity for a MN HS team or two to go to Tier 1 nationals -- but then you run the whole USA Hockey versus MSHSL gauntlet of issues and turf-protection.

It brings us full circle in the endless debate: Why does Mn Hockey do it differently than everywhere else?

Personally, I'm glad we do. I don't have the $$$$ to be a hockey dad anywhere else in the country.

I think the Minnesota association model is fine. It's a model that allows the sport to be enjoyed by the masses and keeps the costs down. More kids playing equals more chances to develop talented hockey players. Turning it into checkbook hockey will, in the end, cause the sport to die a withering death at the youth level. Parents aren't going to want to get their kids into the money pit that hockey can become. You think it's bad now.

I just think MNH should go by birth year like the rest of USAH. The State Tournament wouldn't be harmed by this and it gives associations who win state a chance to go and show what they can do nationally. Also, why can't the MHSHL state champ go on to the USAH Varsity Nationals?

On a more local level, it makes tournaments like the Fargo Squirt International more on a level playing field. How do we really know that the MN squirt teams are better than everyone else when the age bands allow for kids 6 months older?

SCBlueLiner wrote:I think the Minnesota association model is fine. It's a model that allows the sport to be enjoyed by the masses and keeps the costs down. More kids playing equals more chances to develop talented hockey players. Turning it into checkbook hockey will, in the end, cause the sport to die a withering death at the youth level. Parents aren't going to want to get their kids into the money pit that hockey can become. You think it's bad now.

I just think MNH should go by birth year like the rest of USAH. The State Tournament wouldn't be harmed by this and it gives associations who win state a chance to go and show what they can do nationally. Also, why can't the MHSHL state champ go on to the USAH Varsity Nationals?

On a more local level, it makes tournaments like the Fargo Squirt International more on a level playing field. How do we really know that the MN squirt teams are better than everyone else when the age bands allow for kids 6 months older?

Agree that the association model provides a great benefit to enabling the masses to play. Don't want it to be checkbook hockey. But, and I'm not trying to start a whole debate on this again, it wouldn't be hurt by allowing a limited state MANDATED number (4-5), of T1 teams in the state to allow MN to have some of its top end talent compete around the regoin and country. Nothing would change for the associations.

Yes to changing the age bands so teams can compete on a level playing field and have access to other competitive avenues.

SCBlueLiner wrote:I think the Minnesota association model is fine. It's a model that allows the sport to be enjoyed by the masses and keeps the costs down. More kids playing equals more chances to develop talented hockey players. Turning it into checkbook hockey will, in the end, cause the sport to die a withering death at the youth level. Parents aren't going to want to get their kids into the money pit that hockey can become. You think it's bad now.

I just think MNH should go by birth year like the rest of USAH. The State Tournament wouldn't be harmed by this and it gives associations who win state a chance to go and show what they can do nationally. Also, why can't the MHSHL state champ go on to the USAH Varsity Nationals?

On a more local level, it makes tournaments like the Fargo Squirt International more on a level playing field. How do we really know that the MN squirt teams are better than everyone else when the age bands allow for kids 6 months older?

Would be cool to bring the USAH champion in to play the MN champ at the end(Sunday) of the state tournament for a national championship game. Another packed house!

Bring in Minnesota's own, John Madden?

In the EHA room at Braemar there are a couple of posters from when they hosted the “Bantam National Championships”. I don’t remember the year but I think it was around 2000.

I assume this means that Minnesota teams participated back then? Was that before the change to the July 1st cutoff?

JSR wrote: The part about the MN State tourney having more spectators and more media I absolutely agree with. Anyone who has been to a MN state tournament knows it is quite a spectacle and quite something to go watch....

However, your other statement is nt grounded in reality. BSM and STA showed that two private schools who have managed to recruit some of the state of Minnesota's very best talent are able to skate at the Tier 1 AAA level this year and do well (that has not been the case in some recent previous seasons). Edina's PWAA team also showed that this year the largest AA association in MN can field a PWAA team that can compete with the very best out there in AAA land. However, those examples do not represent the state as a whole, so to say the state tournament represents a level of overall competition that is on par with AAA National Tournaments is a bit of a stretch IMHO, there is a team or two but overall top to bottom.... I do not believe that to be an accurate statement

Let's really ground this in reality.

Yeah, the privates do recruit some good talent - fair statement. I would say to your point though that the 2 MN teams that beat Shattuck have also been beat by public HS teams this year. And this year has lots of parity in the top 10 - AND yes Shattuck has historically beaten our private schools, but our private schools are not always the very best team(s) our state has to offer (they are in the top, but not THE top - usually).

And the point about Edina PWAA..if you look at their schedule results, you'll see that not every game are they blowing out their opponents. There are some close games. So could a couple other MN associations be a top 10 tier 1 team at the peewee level? - probable. And many teams could compete already in the top 30 tier 1 teams I'd bet - which is where we're told the "depth" drops off.

The point is - MN hockey, youth and HS, is competitive and produces top end talent year in and year out. And we do it at low cost. So really, our model is great for our state.

goaliewithfoggedglasses wrote:In the EHA room at Braemar there are a couple of posters from when they hosted the “Bantam National Championships”. I don’t remember the year but I think it was around 2000.

I assume this means that Minnesota teams participated back then? Was that before the change to the July 1st cutoff?

That was before USAH went to birthyear.
MNH used to be 9/1, they changed to 7/1 to follow USAH. USAH changed to birth year and MNH decided not to follow and stayed at 7/1.
I think I got the history correct...

Snap Happy wrote:

JSR wrote: The part about the MN State tourney having more spectators and more media I absolutely agree with. Anyone who has been to a MN state tournament knows it is quite a spectacle and quite something to go watch....

However, your other statement is nt grounded in reality. BSM and STA showed that two private schools who have managed to recruit some of the state of Minnesota's very best talent are able to skate at the Tier 1 AAA level this year and do well (that has not been the case in some recent previous seasons). Edina's PWAA team also showed that this year the largest AA association in MN can field a PWAA team that can compete with the very best out there in AAA land. However, those examples do not represent the state as a whole, so to say the state tournament represents a level of overall competition that is on par with AAA National Tournaments is a bit of a stretch IMHO, there is a team or two but overall top to bottom.... I do not believe that to be an accurate statement

Let's really ground this in reality.

Yeah, the privates do recruit some good talent - fair statement. I would say to your point though that the 2 MN teams that beat Shattuck have also been beat by public HS teams this year. And this year has lots of parity in the top 10 - AND yes Shattuck has historically beaten our private schools, but our private schools are not always the very best team(s) our state has to offer (they are in the top, but not THE top - usually).

And the point about Edina PWAA..if you look at their schedule results, you'll see that not every game are they blowing out their opponents. There are some close games. So could a couple other MN associations be a top 10 tier 1 team at the peewee level? - probable. And many teams could compete already in the top 30 tier 1 teams I'd bet - which is where we're told the "depth" drops off.

The point is - MN hockey, youth and HS, is competitive and produces top end talent year in and year out. And we do it at low cost. So really, our model is great for our state.

Yes Edina has a had a couple of decent matches against the MN #2 and #3 ranked teams but look what happens when they play MN #6 and below, it's not pretty.... but anyway I am actually not really disputing anything you are saying, you apparently chose not to read what I was responding to, which was this statement:

there's a strong case to be made that State (aka MN State tourney) actually meets and maybe even exceeds (Tier 1) Nationals in terms of the quality of play

Teams outside the top 10 to 15 aren't participating in the National tournament as a general rule so your top 30 statemetn is irrelevant because we were not debating how many teams could just generally play Tier 1 we were debating that the MN State tourneys were a better more competitive tournament than Tier 1 national tournaments. I agreed that a couple of teams in the MN state tourney coudl obviously compete and compete well at the national tourney but I do not think there is evidence to suggest that it is top to bottom more competitive, especially at the youth levels. The OP suggested that what Edina did at the PWAA level is evidence of this but consider that Edina had troble with #6 Compuware but has never had any trouble with MN #6 Wayzata in multiple games, to me that is evidence of the contrary of what the OP was suggesting. Quit acting like someone is attacking your mother, no one is disputing that there is not great hockey in MN or that there are not plenty of teams who could compete in the Tier 1 league but some folks need to "temper" their enthusiasm with a bit of grounded reality is all I am saying

JSR wrote:

Snap Happy wrote:

JSR wrote: The part about the MN State tourney having more spectators and more media I absolutely agree with. Anyone who has been to a MN state tournament knows it is quite a spectacle and quite something to go watch....

However, your other statement is nt grounded in reality. BSM and STA showed that two private schools who have managed to recruit some of the state of Minnesota's very best talent are able to skate at the Tier 1 AAA level this year and do well (that has not been the case in some recent previous seasons). Edina's PWAA team also showed that this year the largest AA association in MN can field a PWAA team that can compete with the very best out there in AAA land. However, those examples do not represent the state as a whole, so to say the state tournament represents a level of overall competition that is on par with AAA National Tournaments is a bit of a stretch IMHO, there is a team or two but overall top to bottom.... I do not believe that to be an accurate statement

Let's really ground this in reality.

Yeah, the privates do recruit some good talent - fair statement. I would say to your point though that the 2 MN teams that beat Shattuck have also been beat by public HS teams this year. And this year has lots of parity in the top 10 - AND yes Shattuck has historically beaten our private schools, but our private schools are not always the very best team(s) our state has to offer (they are in the top, but not THE top - usually).

And the point about Edina PWAA..if you look at their schedule results, you'll see that not every game are they blowing out their opponents. There are some close games. So could a couple other MN associations be a top 10 tier 1 team at the peewee level? - probable. And many teams could compete already in the top 30 tier 1 teams I'd bet - which is where we're told the "depth" drops off.

The point is - MN hockey, youth and HS, is competitive and produces top end talent year in and year out. And we do it at low cost. So really, our model is great for our state.

Yes Edina has a had a couple of decent matches against the MN #2 and #3 ranked teams but look what happens when they play MN #6 and below, it's not pretty.... but anyway I am actually not really disputing anything you are saying, you apparently chose not to read what I was responding to, which was this statement:

there's a strong case to be made that State (aka MN State tourney) actually meets and maybe even exceeds (Tier 1) Nationals in terms of the quality of play

Teams outside the top 10 to 15 aren't participating in the National tournament as a general rule so your top 30 statemetn is irrelevant because we were not debating how many teams could just generally play Tier 1 we were debating that the MN State tourneys were a better more competitive tournament than Tier 1 national tournaments. I agreed that a couple of teams in the MN state tourney coudl obviously compete and compete well at the national tourney but I do not think there is evidence to suggest that it is top to bottom more competitive, especially at the youth levels. The OP suggested that what Edina did at the PWAA level is evidence of this but consider that Edina had troble with #6 Compuware but has never had any trouble with MN #6 Wayzata in multiple games, to me that is evidence of the contrary of what the OP was suggesting. Quit acting like someone is attacking your mother, no one is disputing that there is not great hockey in MN or that there are not plenty of teams who could compete in the Tier 1 league but some folks need to "temper" their enthusiasm with a bit of grounded reality is all I am saying

Fair enough. But you may want to consider making your "point" by using facts. The illustrations you provided are not "grounded" in reality - and that was entirely my point.

Yeah, the privates do recruit some good talent - fair statement. I would say to your point though that the 2 MN teams that beat Shattuck have also been beat by public HS teams this year. And this year has lots of parity in the top 10 - AND yes Shattuck has historically beaten our private schools, but our private schools are not always the very best team(s) our state has to offer (they are in the top, but not THE top - usually).

And the point about Edina PWAA..if you look at their schedule results, you'll see that not every game are they blowing out their opponents. There are some close games. So could a couple other MN associations be a top 10 tier 1 team at the peewee level? - probable. And many teams could compete already in the top 30 tier 1 teams I'd bet - which is where we're told the "depth" drops off.





EP just took them to a close game 3-3 until last ten seconds of the game. Don't Want to hear excuses. Buddy said EP is a much improved squad. So you are right they aren't blowing everyone out. Other teams could be top tier material too. Not just Edina.

USA Hockey has made videos with that Leprauchan sounding guy from Canada talking about how to develop elite athletes. One of his warnings is, "don't confuse the ability of adults to organize with real athletic talent."

Isn't that what many are doing here?

Benilde this, Shattuck that...the teams are better because of how they were formed. Not because kids magically improved when they drove up Hwy 100 and passed through the doorway of a Catholic HS.

Same in Detroit. They start by fielding five teams of the best players they can find for each birthyear.

Minnesota starts by forming teams based on where you live. That doesn't make the kids in Detroit better players as Pee Wees.

At some age obviously you have to have the better players play with other very good players. This is a thread on the youth forum. I don't really think it is needed for age 12 down. Maybe age 14-16. The more of these threads the more I settle on that view. I just can't bring myself to worry about the real good 9 year old in a small association. He'll turn out fine.

Asking this as an honest question........why did USA Hockey go to the birth year system in the first place? Kids that play AAA/Tier 1 Hockey still go to school right? Some of them would presumably play with kids that go to the same school they do wouldn't they? If so, wouldn't those kids still want to play with their buddies who are most likely in the same grade? Not having high school hockey as an end game doesn't change that.

Unless I'm missing it.....the reason for their system is because its easier to say 2001 than it is to say 5th grader. The reason for our system is so kids can play with their buddies.

Ours is a better reason than theirs is, plain and simple.

going by grade in our system is fine, just wish it was only one grade per level like most other youth sports. Can be up to 3 different birth years in our system and that is too much variance to lump together.

ASmoothSheet wrote:going by grade in our system is fine, just wish it was only one grade per level like most other youth sports. Can be up to 3 different birth years in our system and that is too much variance to lump together.

Most areas, even in Minnesota, need to have two-year age groups in order to field teams. There just aren't enough kids playing in most associations.

Section 8 guy wrote:Asking this as an honest question........why did USA Hockey go to the birth year system in the first place? Kids that play AAA/Tier 1 Hockey still go to school right? Some of them would presumably play with kids that go to the same school they do wouldn't they? If so, wouldn't those kids still want to play with their buddies who are most likely in the same grade? Not having high school hockey as an end game doesn't change that.

Unless I'm missing it.....the reason for their system is because its easier to say 2001 than it is to say 5th grader. The reason for our system is so kids can play with their buddies.

Ours is a better reason than theirs is, plain and simple.

We live in a state that uses birth year. There are more than plenty of "classmates" for all the players involved on their team so they do play with their buddies and no one thinks twice about it down here. In soccer they use a cutoff similar to theone MN uses for hockey and there are no more or less kids in different grades on the soccer team compared to the hockey team.... just sayin

Biggest problem with MN Hockey is the 2 year window for each level. They claim to want to reduce concussions but that is almost impossible with a 6'+ 150lb+ '97 birthyear kid running around trying to blow up the just over 5' 110lb '99 birthyear player.

snowpuck wrote:Yeah, the privates do recruit some good talent - fair statement. I would say to your point though that the 2 MN teams that beat Shattuck have also been beat by public HS teams this year. And this year has lots of parity in the top 10 - AND yes Shattuck has historically beaten our private schools, but our private schools are not always the very best team(s) our state has to offer (they are in the top, but not THE top - usually).

And the point about Edina PWAA..if you look at their schedule results, you'll see that not every game are they blowing out their opponents. There are some close games. So could a couple other MN associations be a top 10 tier 1 team at the peewee level? - probable. And many teams could compete already in the top 30 tier 1 teams I'd bet - which is where we're told the "depth" drops off.

EP just took them to a close game 3-3 until last ten seconds of the game. Don't Want to hear excuses. Buddy said EP is a much improved squad. So you are right they aren't blowing everyone out. Other teams could be top tier material too. Not just Edina.

In the 45 games Edina has played previous to the 3 Tier 1 games they just played they have a 45-0 record. Of those 45 games 37 of them were decided by 4 or more goals, 28 of them by 5 or more goals.... I assume EP stands for Eden Prairie, their previous 3 games against EP were 5-0, 12-1, 8-3.........

As for other teams, well if you believe the myhockeyrankings.com rankings deserve any "credence" at all, combined with the anecdotal evidence provided by not just the Edina games but a few other games that MN teams have played against out of state foes and use those two things you can come to the educated guess of an OPINION that the Edina PWAA team (as is without birth changes) would be a Top 5 team in Tier 1 (probably Top 3), Lakeville South PWAA would be somewhere in the Top 10 (around 7th or 8th probably), Centennial PWAA and Minnetonka PWAA would be hanging around somewhere between 25th and 30th and Wayzata PWAA would be somewhere around between 30th and 35th in the Tier 1 rankings..... I will leave it at that..............

OT-
There are many teams across the country that field teams comprised two birth years. The difference is the age of the oldest kid on the team determines the classification (example; Edina would have been considered a 99 or bantam team regardless of (1) 99 or (10) 99's). I really don't mean to beat a dead horse.

Agree, birth year designations would be difficult at some of the outlying areas (LF) but easily accomplished in the metro.

I'm really not convinced it has any impact other than creating an apples to apples comparison. Most kids are more like apples to grapes anyway, meaning genetics are the denominator in the end. A kid at 12 yrs could be 6' 140 lbs or they could be 4'-9" 78 lbs. You can't cover every scenario.

I've heard many excuses from parents when their kid is late in the birth year. Such as "my kid is almost a 00". When in reality they are a Nov or Dec 99 birth date. All you can say to them is you should of planned a little better, a birth year is a birth year, kinda like a car?

In the end , it seems to only be an issue until high school age anyway, with U16 & U18 aligning more with JV and Varsity.

Why is this such a big deal in hockey ? A few years back CDH had a running back that was20 when he graduated [Carl Mcallaugh] He ended up w/a ride to Wis. starting in a Rose bowl . Why do hockey folks make such a big deal about it. I hear the same thing, "oh he's a young02" or he's a old 98. An old 98?? come on !!!

Why do hockey folks make such a big deal about it. I hear the same thing, "oh he's a young02" or he's a old 98. An old 98?? come on !!!

Cuz parents like to make excuses.

This is when I like to share these links. Chicago Mission 2000 team has only 4 players with birthdays after July 1.

http://www.chicagomission.com/teams/00.htm

The 1999 team has one player born after July 1.

http://www.chicagomission.com/teams/99.htm

Both of these Tier 1 AAA teams are currently ranked #1 in the country.

I will say the Minnesota system of winter/summer is best because during the winter season the after July 1s have an advantage and during the summer season the before July 1s have the advantage. For sure the best youth development model.

JSR wrote: I assume EP stands for Eden Prairie, their previous 3 games against EP were 5-0, 12-1, 8-3.........

Simple fact that you have to make the statement that you're "assuming EP means Eden Prairie" - reveals that you probably know a lot less than you think you do about MN hockey - just sayin'