Here is the link to the article:
http://www.twincities.com/prep/ci_13147 ... ck_check=1
EastRidge HS
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)
-
- Posts: 6132
- Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 2:33 pm
- Location: Inver Grove Heights, MN
- Contact:
To be clear the "Double Co-op" was denied. I assume the single Eastridge/Woodbury Co-op will go though no problem and then Park CG will stand alone - at least for the next two years. Seems the article states something similar as being likely. I'm not suprised that the MSHSL ruled as they did on this as it was an extremely unusual request. It impacts the Park CG gals that head to EastRidge the most as they would not be able to play with the Park CG team and instead would have to play on the EastRidge/Woodbury co-op.FrankThom wrote:Pioneer Press reports co-op was denied.
True, what it means is that the Woodbury team would pick up a few of the Park girls. Eastridge is a new school consisting of Park and Woodbury girls, so there are no "Eastridge" girls to co-op with. After 2 years there will be three teams. For the next two years though it should be a boon to Woodbury since they lose no one and pick up Park girls. But after two years the advantage should shift to Park since they will be developing a team with what they have and the "Woodbury" team will be divided between Eastridge and Woodbury. The sad part is that I believe some girls will not be able to play hockey because there will not be enough spots and the school district will not allow intra-district transfers for the next two years (or so I heard). I also hope that the Woodbury coaching staff is fair enough not to deny selecting girls that they know they will lose in a year or two (all of the Park girls and a group of Woodbury girls).ghshockeyfan wrote:To be clear the "Double Co-op" was denied. I assume the single Eastridge/Woodbury Co-op will go though no problem and then Park CG will stand alone - at least for the next two years. Seems the article states something similar as being likely. I'm not suprised that the MSHSL ruled as they did on this as it was an extremely unusual request. It impacts the Park CG gals that head to EastRidge the most as they would not be able to play with the Park CG team and instead would have to play on the EastRidge/Woodbury co-op.FrankThom wrote:Pioneer Press reports co-op was denied.
-
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:39 pm
East Ridge
The whole process with the new school in this district should be studied for how terribly it's been done ... From the boundary issue and transfer rule to the sports teams ...The communication has been at times non-existent, and at best, poor ...Most of us would have no problem with facts, if they are backed-up by reality ...When the facts got in the way, the rules and protocol were changed to protect something, I'm not sure what ...
Many of us believe that administrators who spend most of the time with their fingers in the air taking the tempurature and wind direction of every room they're in instead of making decisions that are best for the schools they oversee are bound to fail ...
This spring they sold the fact that a "dual co-op" was all but assured by the MSHSL ...With very little checking anyone could have realized it was an uphill battle at best ...I too drank that Kool-Aid because it was what "everybody" wanted ...Could they have made a phone call or done a little checking in to it themselves? ...It might have saved months of speculation and gave East Ridge the time to form its own team or make an early co-op with just Woodbury ...Or was a third team in the district never actually a priority at all? ...And if not, why wasn't it? ....
The blame game is always easy to play...With that being said lets move forward with the "next" best thing for all involved ...But do not think for a minute that all of us will forget about this ....From now on when some of us hear B.S. we will call out the people and get to the brass tacks of the issue right there, right then ...
Just a badmans opinion ....
Many of us believe that administrators who spend most of the time with their fingers in the air taking the tempurature and wind direction of every room they're in instead of making decisions that are best for the schools they oversee are bound to fail ...
This spring they sold the fact that a "dual co-op" was all but assured by the MSHSL ...With very little checking anyone could have realized it was an uphill battle at best ...I too drank that Kool-Aid because it was what "everybody" wanted ...Could they have made a phone call or done a little checking in to it themselves? ...It might have saved months of speculation and gave East Ridge the time to form its own team or make an early co-op with just Woodbury ...Or was a third team in the district never actually a priority at all? ...And if not, why wasn't it? ....
The blame game is always easy to play...With that being said lets move forward with the "next" best thing for all involved ...But do not think for a minute that all of us will forget about this ....From now on when some of us hear B.S. we will call out the people and get to the brass tacks of the issue right there, right then ...
Just a badmans opinion ....
Stupidity never takes a day off ....
Re: East Ridge
I agree whole-heartedly. You can even throw in the location of the new school. The walking areas for students going to Eastridge and Woodbury actually butt each other. That's how close the schools are. The only other time I have ever seen this occur is in New York City (population 8 million).hesabaddmann wrote:The whole process with the new school in this district should be studied for how terribly it's been done ... From the boundary issue and transfer rule to the sports teams ...The communication has been at times non-existent, and at best, poor ...Most of us would have no problem with facts, if they are backed-up by reality ...When the facts got in the way, the rules and protocol were changed to protect something, I'm not sure what ...
Many of us believe that administrators who spend most of the time with their fingers in the air taking the tempurature and wind direction of every room they're in instead of making decisions that are best for the schools they oversee are bound to fail ...
This spring they sold the fact that a "dual co-op" was all but assured by the MSHSL ...With very little checking anyone could have realized it was an uphill battle at best ...I too drank that Kool-Aid because it was what "everybody" wanted ...Could they have made a phone call or done a little checking in to it themselves? ...It might have saved months of speculation and gave East Ridge the time to form its own team or make an early co-op with just Woodbury ...Or was a third team in the district never actually a priority at all? ...And if not, why wasn't it? ....
The blame game is always easy to play...With that being said lets move forward with the "next" best thing for all involved ...But do not think for a minute that all of us will forget about this ....From now on when some of us hear B.S. we will call out the people and get to the brass tacks of the issue right there, right then ...
Just a badmans opinion ....
Re: East Ridge
iceage wrote:I agree whole-heartedly. You can even throw in the location of the new school. The walking areas for students going to Eastridge and Woodbury actually butt each other. That's how close the schools are. The only other time I have ever seen this occur is in New York City (population 8 million).hesabaddmann wrote:The whole process with the new school in this district should be studied for how terribly it's been done ... From the boundary issue and transfer rule to the sports teams ...The communication has been at times non-existent, and at best, poor ...Most of us would have no problem with facts, if they are backed-up by reality ...When the facts got in the way, the rules and protocol were changed to protect something, I'm not sure what ...
Many of us believe that administrators who spend most of the time with their fingers in the air taking the tempurature and wind direction of every room they're in instead of making decisions that are best for the schools they oversee are bound to fail ...
This spring they sold the fact that a "dual co-op" was all but assured by the MSHSL ...With very little checking anyone could have realized it was an uphill battle at best ...I too drank that Kool-Aid because it was what "everybody" wanted ...Could they have made a phone call or done a little checking in to it themselves? ...It might have saved months of speculation and gave East Ridge the time to form its own team or make an early co-op with just Woodbury ...Or was a third team in the district never actually a priority at all? ...And if not, why wasn't it? ....
The blame game is always easy to play...With that being said lets move forward with the "next" best thing for all involved ...But do not think for a minute that all of us will forget about this ....From now on when some of us hear B.S. we will call out the people and get to the brass tacks of the issue right there, right then ...
Just a badmans opinion ....
for anyone interested Eastridge
GIRLS HOCKEY MEETING
Girls hockey players and parents are invited to attend a District 833 meeting to discuss next steps for girls hockey on Tuesday, August 25, at 7:00PM at WHS auditorium. (*Change in venue*)
-
- Posts: 7260
- Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:28 pm
Girls hockey programs pick up where the MSHSL left off
WHS/ERHS goes ahead with co-op; Park to go it alone.
By: Patrick Johnson, Woodbury Bulletin
http://www.woodburybulletin.com/event/article/id/32646/
WHS/ERHS goes ahead with co-op; Park to go it alone.
By: Patrick Johnson, Woodbury Bulletin
http://www.woodburybulletin.com/event/article/id/32646/