Private School Tournament

packerboy · Post by **packerboy** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 12:13 pm

Thats right Neut. Who better to recruit new faithful to the cause.

Cathoilics have converted half the world.

Recruiting a few hockey players is nothin.

Ankles Pierre, Jr. · Post by **Ankles Pierre, Jr.** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 12:55 pm

HOWEVER, HM, THEN AHA, NOW CDH, AND SOON BSM WILL NEVER GET SICK OF CARRYING YOUR WATER FOR THE REST OF YOU CATHOLICS!

Neutron 14 · Post by **Neutron 14** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 1:54 pm

Looks like the pagans will need their own tornament...

HShockeywatcher · Post by **HShockeywatcher** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 2:07 pm

As I've said in other threads so many times and never gotten a clear response is that those A teams shouldn't move up. They don't have the history and consistently good teams. Cretin isn't in this discussion because they are only up because they opt up in EVERY sport. The other teams that opt up have programs with a great history. Kennedy can't opt down, but STA can opt up. They will once they go to state for the next ten years, maybe? Not sure. Although it is what everyone is saying, both DM and STA are in competitive A conferences, not AA conferences. They would just be another fish in the big pond. Sure you can give them crap for not doing that, but who would want that. If 10 years go by and both STA and DM get 5th or higher in state 8 out of 10 years, I will agree with all of you that they should opt up. Until that happens, it doesn't make sense.

Ankles Pierre, Jr. · Post by **Ankles Pierre, Jr.** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 2:19 pm

Who made HShockeywatcher the Pope?

Neutron 14 · Post by **Neutron 14** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 2:22 pm

I certainly didn't see any white smoke AP....

Neutron 14 · Post by **Neutron 14** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 2:31 pm

HShockeywatcher wrote:As I've said in other threads so many times and never gotten a clear response is that those A teams shouldn't move up. They don't have the history and consistently good teams. Cretin isn't in this discussion because they are only up because they opt up in EVERY sport. The other teams that opt up have programs with a great history. Kennedy can't opt down, but STA can opt up. They will once they go to state for the next ten years, maybe? Not sure. Although it is what everyone is saying, both DM and STA are in competitive A conferences, not AA conferences. They would just be another fish in the big pond. Sure you can give them crap for not doing that, but who would want that. If 10 years go by and both STA and DM get 5th or higher in state 8 out of 10 years, I will agree with all of you that they should opt up. Until that happens, it doesn't make sense.

I see your point. Results based classification. Only after they crush A opponents for ten years should they move up. Never mind the silly old "able to compete with", your advocating they should only move up if they can win it the AA Championship. Another competative fish in a big pond, we can't have that.

HShockeywatcher · Post by **HShockeywatcher** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 3:46 pm

Well, for one I've made the same point 10+ times in different threads and no one ever has a response for it. And now others are also making that point with no responses in other threads. So, I'm not the Pope at all, just happen to have a correct opinion.

Neutron 14 · Post by **Neutron 14** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:06 pm

HShockeywatcher wrote:Well, for one I've made the same point 10+ times in different threads and no one ever has a response for it. And now others are also making that point with no responses in other threads. So, I'm not the Pope at all, just happen to have a correct opinion.

Correct opinion? Pardon me? Your opinion is just that, not correct or incorrect. While some may agree with it, I certainly do not.

Using your rationale, we should have our Bantam players play at the B level until they win the district 10 times in a row before moving to A. If they're sub .500 at the B level, should we move them to C? How about if we just don't keep score so everyones a winner?

Every youth hockey association in the state puts their team at the highest level they are able to compete. Why should we regress in high school?

McPlayer56 · Post by **McPlayer56** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:33 pm

i think the private schools should have there own state tournament in every sport and not even be assocated with public schools because every one knows they recruit

HShockeywatcher · Post by **HShockeywatcher** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:46 pm

McPlayer, don't even get anyone started. Dumb comment, so many have admitted publics recruit just like privates, which is true. If you're not going to contribute, why even comment?

I'm not saying only move up when they are good enough to win, but when they are too good to be in A. There are many teams that would win the A title every year if they were A teams. Until that happens, why opt up? Warroad has shown time and time again they can dominate state and they have shown time and time again they can't. Of the A teams, they are one with the greatest history. Why not have them move up?

The other point that this points out is having them move up means you're in favor of having a one class system. If all teams that are good move up we have the top half class and the bottom half class. Which is pointless. So if every team moves up that's one class basically.

The other thing that it suggests is maybe a progressive state. Where if you're good enough to make it in the lower, you move up and if you're not good enough, you move down. That's how many leagues do tournaments; the winner of the B league goes up to A and the loser down to C.

All in all two points.
1. Why STA and DM and not a team like Warroad?
2. Why would a team who isn't dominating, but doing well want to move up?

(STA won all the state games by a goal, two of them in OT, and one after being down by 2 with 6 minutes left in the 3rd. Doesn't sound like a dominating team to me)

Neutron 14 · Post by **Neutron 14** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 8:34 pm

HShockeywatcher wrote: All in all two points.
1. Why STA and DM and not a team like Warroad?
2. Why would a team who isn't dominating, but doing well want to move up?

1. When did I say privates only?
2. Ask Roseau. They seem to grasp what you can't.

HShockeywatcher · Post by **HShockeywatcher** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 9:10 pm

1. Privates are the only ones you've mentioned.
2. Seem to grasp what I can't. Obviously what you can't either since you can't answer.

Ankles Pierre, Jr. · Post by **Ankles Pierre, Jr.** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:27 am

Any team who whines about who they have to play should be moved to the girl's league!

Neutron 14 · Post by **Neutron 14** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 9:00 am

HShockeywatcher wrote:1. Privates are the only ones you've mentioned.
2. Seem to grasp what I can't. Obviously what you can't either since you can't answer.

1. Where did I mention any school, public or private?

2. I answered your 2nd question in the prior post, and unlike you, see no need to repeat myself over and over trying to convince anyone to agree.

Ankles Pierre, Jr. · Post by **Ankles Pierre, Jr.** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 9:11 am

Any team who whines about who they have to play should be moved to the girl's league!

Neutron 14 · Post by **Neutron 14** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 9:38 am

Ankles Pierre, Jr. · Post by **Ankles Pierre, Jr.** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:33 am

N14 sharing AP's humor...

...I feel sorry for them both.

HShockeywatcher · Post by **HShockeywatcher** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:42 am

so what's the point of two classes if one is all the good teams and one is all the bad teams?

If teams can opt up, should there be a way for bad AA teams to go down?

Ankles Pierre, Jr. · Post by **Ankles Pierre, Jr.** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:49 am

HShockeywatcher should have stopped after writing, "so what's the point of two classes if one is all the good teams and one is all the bad teams."

This edit by AP makes you look smarter.

Ankles Pierre, Jr. · Post by **Ankles Pierre, Jr.** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:51 am

"so what's the point of two classes..."

...better yet.

Knowlzee · Post by **Knowlzee** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 12:17 pm

Is that where every team has the SAME opportunity to win a state championship, no ADVANTAGE for the schools with smaller enrollments. That doesn't seem "fair".

If there was only one tournament, there would be no opportunity to debate about "which champion is the best".

If there was only one tournament, we would probably be able to remember which team was the winner from year to year.

If there was only one tournament, the trophy would actuall mean something, and the school would actually be proud to display it, rather than shove it in some case with all the other thousand trophies that don't mean anything.

If there was only one tournament, we would be denying 8 teams their RIGHT to participate in a state tournament.

Each team with the SAME opportunity, with no ADVANTAGES, is that "fair"? Without an advantage, little schools like Warroad, BSM, and St Thomas would never experience what it is like to play in a state tournament,...and only the large schools like Eden Prairie, Lakeville, and Wayzata would win the championship every year.

packerboy · Post by **packerboy** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 12:59 pm

We have 2 classes because it provides a lot of revenue to the MSHSL so it can pay salaries and finance tournaments for other 'non revenue 'sports.

But I dont have any problem with having 2 classes.

Its kids playing hockey. The more the better. It also is probably good for the growth of the sport.

I have either watched on TV and/ or attended portions of every state tournament since about 1960. It is as big an event in my family now with my kids as it was when I was a kid. "It" being the now AA tournamnet.

Giving Hutchinson, Fergus Falls, Orono, etc a chance to play in a state tournament in St Paul doesnt bother me. Its OK to ackowledge that there are smaller communities/programs that play a good brand of hockey that cant compete with the larger schools. Thats all Class A is.

It doesnt effect my enjoyment of the tournamat at all. In fact, I loved watching some of the Class A games over the last several years , especially that Warroad/ TG championship game a couple of years ago.

Knowlzee · Post by **Knowlzee** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:37 pm

Maybe we should encourage the MSHSL to add another class in the tournament for the "brand" of hockey played by the likes of Bagley and Sleepy Eye. They seem to have difficulty competing too. Wouldn't that be a nice gesture?

More revenue,....more kids playing hockey,.....probably good for growth of the sport,......probably would have a very enjoyable close scoring championship game once in awhile.

They need a tournament of their own. It is not fair, they just cannot compete with the majority of the other schools with the "brand" of hockey that they play.

HShockeywatcher · Post by **HShockeywatcher** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:54 pm

From my example of football, everyone knows why there are multiple classes. In short, it doesn't say anything to who the "best" team is, it says which team from each class was able to win the state tournament.

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Private School Tournament

What do you think?

Crusade Now!

FALLACY!

There's no whining in men's hockey

There's no whining in men's hockey

Double Trouble

Zip it

...better yet

A one class tournament?

the more the better.