HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

northwoods oldtimer wrote:Elliot, I think that Fred wants to request getting the Pool restored to where the 1 of the top 2 teams out of each pool have to be defeated twice on Sunday. That would be my vote to have Red #1 play Blue #1 - Winner advance to State as #1 Seed. #2 Red play #2 Blue - Winner plays against Loser of Red#1 and Blue#1 for right to represent as #2 Seed out of Region. Thanks.

DumpandChase1 wrote:Elliott,

Regarding regions. With this new format, districts 1,4,5 should never be in the same region as will be the case next year.

My vote would be to go back to the old way with the maroon region and a true double elimination.

elliott70 wrote:

DumpandChase1 wrote:Elliott,

Regarding regions. With this new format, districts 1,4,5 should never be in the same region as will be the case next year.

My vote would be to go back to the old way with the maroon region and a true double elimination.

Yes, there has been some arguemnt to that point.
Also, having the north all in their own region.

We will see what happens Friday night.

wannagototherink wrote:

elliott70 wrote:

DumpandChase1 wrote:Elliott,

Regarding regions. With this new format, districts 1,4,5 should never be in the same region as will be the case next year.

My vote would be to go back to the old way with the maroon region and a true double elimination.

Yes, there has been some arguemnt to that point.
Also, having the north all in their own region.

We will see what happens Friday night.

Go to 8 Districts, and each Districts send one Champion to the State Tournament. Cut down on the added travel cost of one weekend by just having a District playdown tournament and not a region tournament. Can run the playoffs as a single or double elimination doesn't matter just keep it the same in every districts. Cut cost, cut games, can make a whole lot of people happy. Can structure the districts "loosely" around the high school sections.

Districts would be too big with only 8 districts increasing costs and travel time.
Loosely around HS sections would put Hallock and Bufalo in the same section, Andover and Int'l. Falls.
Northern people enjoy the district level play.
Also, administratively it would be a nightmare.

I also think that all Bantam games should be standardized to 17 minute, stop time periods. Afterall, we don't follow USA hockey's age because we want to foster high school hockey, well if that is the case, we should be getting bantam aged kids ready for that next level.

Some districts do play 17 minute periods.
D16 plays 17 minues at A & B level for bantams and peewees. Girls play 15 minute periods. (Stop time with one resurface. Running time in 3rd period wit 6 goal lead at the discretion of the traveling team.) Madating it is difficult becasue of the varous way rinks are run.

I also think that is the reason we need to bring back the tag up offsides rule, however, I'm not as sold on that rule. I think the offsides as it is currently does help in developing defensmen, but I wouldn't be totally against going to the tag up.

This is strictly up to USA Hockey. MN HOckey does ot have the power to do a wholesale change. Districts could revise this rule for games, but games across district lines and tournaments would have to revert.

elliott70 wrote:

wannagototherink wrote:

elliott70 wrote: Yes, there has been some arguemnt to that point.
Also, having the north all in their own region.

We will see what happens Friday night.

Go to 8 Districts, and each Districts send one Champion to the State Tournament. Cut down on the added travel cost of one weekend by just having a District playdown tournament and not a region tournament. Can run the playoffs as a single or double elimination doesn't matter just keep it the same in every districts. Cut cost, cut games, can make a whole lot of people happy. Can structure the districts "loosely" around the high school sections.

Districts would be too big with only 8 districts increasing costs and travel time.
Loosely around HS sections would put Hallock and Bufalo in the same section, Andover and Int'l. Falls.
Northern people enjoy the district level play.
Also, administratively it would be a nightmare.

I also think that all Bantam games should be standardized to 17 minute, stop time periods. Afterall, we don't follow USA hockey's age because we want to foster high school hockey, well if that is the case, we should be getting bantam aged kids ready for that next level.

Some districts do play 17 minute periods.
D16 plays 17 minues at A & B level for bantams and peewees. Girls play 15 minute periods. (Stop time with one resurface. Running time in 3rd period wit 6 goal lead at the discretion of the traveling team.) Madating it is difficult becasue of the varous way rinks are run.

I also think that is the reason we need to bring back the tag up offsides rule, however, I'm not as sold on that rule. I think the offsides as it is currently does help in developing defensmen, but I wouldn't be totally against going to the tag up.

This is strictly up to USA Hockey. MN HOckey does ot have the power to do a wholesale change. Districts could revise this rule for games, but games across district lines and tournaments would have to revert.

wannagototherink wrote:
Well I had some responses all typed up and then accidentally hit something and all I had was what shows up above.

Ironic that the only thing left are the letters, mt.
"Empty"


Elliott,

I appreciate the response, when I say "loosely" around the high school sections, the examples you gave are exactly the situations I'm talking about. Don't put those teams in the same districts. I think if you look at the northern districts, they need to be looked at.......District 12 has what 5 teams.....District 11 has 4/5 depending on the year (I'm talking at the A level of course) Where a districts like D10 or D8 has so many teams that they all don't even make the playoffs. But I have never really expected this to change ever, I just like the idea of it. You could move metro teams around to make the districts down there more appropriate...as far as travel distance, I can't imagine the trip from Moorhead to Roseau is really much longer than Moorhead to Brainerd. There will always be travel in hockey and to take a weekend out of your season or a saturday and drive to play those games at a longer distance than so be it. Growing up we used to make those day trips all the time.

Mandating game lengths shouldn't be a problem. If the arena's want to host the games than they must adjust. It wasn't too long ago when the doors would open in the metro area at the 1 hour 5 minute mark, whether the game was over, or had 8 minutes left. The fact is, if Minnesota Hockey said Bantam games are to be 17 minute stop time periods with a resurface, than that is the way it has to be. Personally, this is a topic that MH should take a hard line on. Two many kids are looking for other options, this is a simple way to keep kids from leaving...offer them more hockey. Has D16 always run 17 minute periods? I don't think so...D10 has only been doing it for a handful of years, the fact is, if it is mandated the arena's will adjust, simply because they need MH hockey teams to survive.

In any event, I can't tell you how much I personally appreciate that you ask us our opinions on this board. I think if more of your commrades would follow your lead, MH hockey would see a lot less problems and complaints. Thank you!

greybeard58 wrote:The big question now to ask is how many on this forum that have complained on how Mn Hockey does things are going to really take the time and attend the Mn Hockey meeting this weekend?
The location is published and the dates and times of the different committee are also posted. These meetings are open to the public, if you plan on attending I would think it would be proper to act as a guest and be respectful of the many board and committee members at their sessions.

zboni99 wrote:I like the 17 minute mandate for all Bantam games A,B,C levels sate wide. The rinks and associations will adjust.
The first post in the redistricting sticky thread is over 2 years old. You won't please everyone involved so make some hard decisions and in 3 -5 years see what worked and what did not work and adjust accordingly. I appreciate all the volunteer time, but over 2 years of discussion????

watchdog wrote:elliot- is it possible to discuss a rule on neck guards? my kids wont wear them unless its mandatory.

Neck guards are being studied at the USA Hockey level.
As of last report that I had, the current guards are not to a standard that makes them a safety device. When design and material are improved USA Hockey will mandate them. I believe it is 4 or 5 years out before this happens.

also i realize a format for playoffs is what it is. the only thing that gets me is the amount of times teams play each other. this situation is hardley brought up. maybe were allowing two many teams into region play. roseau for example this year at the peewee level had to play crookston and egf in distracts and regions. even a marginal team is hard to beat 5 times in one season....

You need to play every team in the district twice - H & H.
At district play you may se them again and if going backdoor in modified double elimination may see one team twice.

Regions, you may be pooled with another D16 team, it depends on the year. In the crossover game, who knows. But if you are there, that's a good thing. And if a second D16 team is there, I think that is a good thing.

Bemidji bantam A's beat Roseau 4 times during the year and lost on Sunday when it mattered most in their 5th meeting.