HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Johnson and Como will either be moved to D2 or D8.
This will be decided by April.

As parent of a Rochester player, I am a little concerned about competition level in the new district 9. If you look at the Pee Wee and Bantam A rankings at Minnesota Hockey Rankings you can see

group -- Rochester -- top District 9 competition -- bottom
2010 PeeWee -- 15.69 -- 10.91 (Mankato) -- 2.30 (Waseca)
2009 PeeWee -- 12.39 -- 9.07 (Owatonna) -- 2.43 (Waseca)
2010 Bantam -- 12.57 -- 8.12 (Red Wing) -- 4.69 (New Ulm)
2009 Bantam -- 15.77-- 8.69 (Faribault) -- 3.62 (St. Peter)

The expected win for any of these four teams ranges from +3.32 goals to +13.39 goals. This does neither these teams nor the other district 9 teams any good.

A solution might be to have the top squirt, pee wee, and bantam teams play in District 8 where they are of similar level and have the remaining teams play in District 9 with the top one playing district at the A level. There would be one additional hour long trip for the district 8 A teams. The addition of a competitive team should make that one trip worthwhile.

There is not much data about how a second Rochester team would compete in district 9, but in 2009, there were two Rochester Bantam A teams. The second team was rated at 7.54. This was within a goal of most of the other teams in the district. This was a good year so perhaps Rochester wouldn't do as well, but competition still should be closer.

Yay Minnesota Hockey! You finally got something done!

Rochester has been invited to D8 scheduling to assure competitive games for their teams.

Elliot, it's not teams it's team..1 at each A level.

Here's a thought..have Rochester field more than 1 A team

Good grief they complain about competition but intentionally slant their association towards an unfair advantage over the rest of the state. How many cities with over 100,000 people field 1 A team? I understand their complaint about competition but at the same time see an oportunity to stop with the nonsense that a town of over 100,000 can only field 1 A team.

Why punish district 8 teams because Rochester wants to be the St. Thomas Academy of youth hockey? Let 'em field a AAA team out of Wisconsin and call it good.

The situation in Rochester has always made me chuckle. The youth hockey is constantly complaining about competition, but then they meet their "maker" when they have to divide the kids between four high schools. Maybe they should divide the association like Lakeville. For all the talk, the year Minnesota Hocey tried to combined a D4 and D8 schedule(Rochester had two A teams at the Bantam and Pee Wee levels), Faribault Pee Wee A beat both teams and the Bantams beat both teams. Funny, the next year they went back to one A team at each level.

Situations change for every youth hockey organization from year to year. The board of directors has to stay as informed as possible and make adjustments mostly based on numbers of participants but with some thought given to talent level. No one wants to be non-competetive year after year. It's nice to have teams at A,B & C levels but sometimes not practical! No one learns from blow-out losses year after year. If the talent level does not support an "A" program the district involved will allow an association to play "down" a level as necessary. This can and will be reviewed on a yearly basis.
As for Rochester, I know from past experience that no one enjoys a trip from the north end of District 8 to Rochester for a one hour game. However, Rochester routinely would set up three games on a week-end when traveling north for District 8 games! I would hope District 8 will follow up as posted by elliot70.

Soulforged has some good points. Rochester should wait at least a year to pass judgement. I am not sure that they will dominate like all think. Some of the A bantam teams of the past would have been a dominant force in the new D9, I just don't see that out of Roch. anymore. The A PW's are coached very well and have a couple of very physically mature kids on the team but I am not sure they have that dominant of an entire club to be that over the top kind of group. One of those bigger kids probably won't even be there for his bantam years, the Holy-Grail of Roch will be calling.

what is happening to district 4? and where is luverne and worthington going to go?

Soulforged wrote:The situation in Rochester has always made me chuckle. The youth hockey is constantly complaining about competition, but then they meet their "maker" when they have to divide the kids between four high schools. Maybe they should divide the association like Lakeville. For all the talk, the year Minnesota Hocey tried to combined a D4 and D8 schedule(Rochester had two A teams at the Bantam and Pee Wee levels), Faribault Pee Wee A beat both teams and the Bantams beat both teams. Funny, the next year they went back to one A team at each level.

You need to look at the whole picture. Yes RYHA feeds four high school programs and in order to do that there are players on varsity teams that played B1, B2 & even C level hokey at the youth level. Yes some of the smaller associations in the new D9 might provide some competition at the A level, but will provide no competition at the B1 level and probably do not even field teams at the B2 level.

With that said the D9 schedule is only 16 games and with the Peewee and Bantam teams play over 50 games they should be able to schedule more comtetive teams outside the district.

goldy313 wrote:Elliot, it's not teams it's team..1 at each A level.

Here's a thought..have Rochester field more than 1 A team

Good grief they complain about competition but intentionally slant their association towards an unfair advantage over the rest of the state. How many cities with over 100,000 people field 1 A team? I understand their complaint about competition but at the same time see an oportunity to stop with the nonsense that a town of over 100,000 can only field 1 A team.

Why punish district 8 teams because Rochester wants to be the St. Thomas Academy of youth hockey? Let 'em field a AAA team out of Wisconsin and call it good.

Goldy, There will be 3 A teams at SQ, PW, BT this winter. First time since '96-'97. It will take a few years to see how it works.

Why are they going from 1 A team to 3 A teams? Is it to balance strength with other members of the District?

With the merger of these two organizations, MN Hockey did nothing to help the groups by putting them in District 8. How much more inconvenient can you make it for parents. Parents should have the option to waiver their child from the new organization - there should be another option available. The new Board has told parents there will be no waivers. Our next option is to tell our child to find another activity.

Pretty sure Johnson/Como requested D8. MN Hockey wouldn't have much to do with that decision other than approving the Johnson/Como request. Highland-Central has gone to D2 so I was surprised that Johnson/Como didn't request the same. Think you need to speak with Johnson/Como leadership about that one.

Night Train wrote:Pretty sure Johnson/Como requested D8. MN Hockey wouldn't have much to do with that decision other than approving the Johnson/Como request. Highland-Central has gone to D2 so I was surprised that Johnson/Como didn't request the same. Think you need to speak with Johnson/Como leadership about that one.

Night Train is correct. Minnesota Hockey promised and allowed each District 1 Association to choose which District they wanted to play in. Each District has their own cultures and District 8 had a culture which Johnson-Como leadership must have felt was a good fit.

With the exception of Richfield, all former District 1 associations have been allowed to go where their memberships have requested and Minnesota hockey has honored their moves to their requested Districts.

Thanks Night Train and SWPrez for the info. We were told the new organization was not allowed into D2. The new name "Devils" seems to be a fit considering mixd truths. Another reason to pull our sons from the program and the demise of metro hockey continues. So sad.

U2Care wrote:Thanks Night Train and SWPrez for the info. We were told the new organization was not allowed into D2. The new name "Devils" seems to be a fit considering mixd truths. Another reason to pull our sons from the program and the demise of metro hockey continues. So sad.

U2Care, I may be wrong, but I think D2 has some strict rules that would have made it difficult for Como/Johnson. May be that all associations must field an A team at all levels to participate? Not sure, but I have heard D2 may be a bit more difficult to deal with if you don't fit the mold. I think your association leaders made the right choice, you probably just need to get a little more info regarding the D2 situation that led them to that decision.

I believe that there should be an option/grace period for familes to waiver out when associations merge. But Johnson/Como are holding everyone hostage - these are kids! The greater majority will probably not even play hockey beyond Bantams. This merger will probably only last a few years anyways as numbers continue to dwindle....including my children.

Way to get on board and apply all your energy to help make the new Johnson/Como Association a success. It all starts with dedicated volunteers and recruiting.

60 new mites, boys and girls, this year.

observer wrote:Why are they going from 1 A team to 3 A teams? Is it to balance strength with other members of the District?

Sorry I was napping...
One A team at each level will not play a D9 schedule but focus on playing against metro teams. I think the bantam A metro team will play in the Maroon & Gold program. The other two teams will skate in the D9 league.

RYHA feeds 4 high school teams for boys. (The girls feed 3 Rochester HS teams and a smaller number go to Dodge County). As mentioned earlier, there are varsity players that played C hockey. The intent is to develop more players playing at a higher level.

In '96-'98 RYHA had three squirt A teams.

Mac15: Don't mean they will have 1 A team and 2 B teams playing in a D9 "A" league?

Mac15: And there will now be "C" players playing on "A" teams?

Last year RYHA had the following number of teams at these levels:
BA - 1, BB - 2, BB2 -2, BC - 2
PA - 1, PB - 2, PB2 - 2, PC(house) - 4

If you are disparaging the skill level of the players I guess you are entitled to your opinion. If you think this years kids are jumping 2 levels then you'd be wrong.

'10-'11 plan:
BA - 3, BB - 3, BB2 (if D9 has it) - 2 [otherwise it will be BC - 2]
At most some kids will play one level up from last year's teams - so no C players will be playing A.

Mac15: I was not putting down "C" players, I thought you were when you said "C" players are playing high school hockey and it almost seems as if you eliminate the "C" level, then no "C" players will be playing in HS?

I would stand corrected that no "C" players would be playing "A", only "B".

Though it was my understanding the southsiders want their own "A" team, which in fact would have "C" level players playing at the "A" level.

It all comes down to who you classify as a C player.

Is it anyone below the top 34 assuming 1 A and 1 B team?
Who are you comparing them too? A Wayzata C team could be at many A teams.

Mac the only drawback I forsee is cost containment, it's far cheaper to play C hockey than A or even B hockey. Will RYHA do anything to keep costs down for those who need it?