HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Jeffy95 wrote:

dueling21 wrote:

Jeffy95 wrote: Yes, and those schools have the option to admit that they have special advantages that 99% of the other Class A schools don't have and move up to AA. STA did just that, so we're down to Hermantown and Breck.

Class A Enrollment means absolutely nothing unless every kid in your program is from your School District. If you pull in top players from all around a Metro area, what does your enrollment matter? It's irrelevant.

So by that logic, we should next be clamoring for all privates (St. Paul Academy, Rochester Lourdes, Providence Academy, Blake, Breck, Minnehaha Academy, Totino-Grace, Legacy Christian, St. Cloud Cathedral), all co-ops with large numbers of schools and /or enrollments (LSHSPTCUC, Minneapolis, Morris-Benson, New Ulm, Windom, St. Paul Johnson, Moose Lake, MAML, Prairie Centre, River Lakes, Wadena-Deer Creek, Northern Lakes, North Shore, etc.), and all traditionally strong programs that draw in kids (Warroad, East Grand Forks, Thief River Falls, Hibbing, Hermantown, Mahtomedi, Mankato West, etc.).

There ain't a whole lot left to form a Class A field...

No, that's not even close to what I said. I said if you pull in TOP players from a METRO area. Hermantown and Breck are the only two on your list that fit that LOGIC. Those are also the two that I mentioned. I realize that some of those other privates are in the Twin Cities Metro, but they are hardly destination schools for hockey players.

I said nothing about co-ops. Teams co-op to survive, not to dominate a sport.

So, where do you draw the line? Should ever metro school be AA then since in an ideal world you should be attracting students from all over? When are private schools allowed to stay in Class A based on this model? Why do we assume that private schools (or any school really) are pulling from more than the student population of their school? Or are you really results oriented only? If a school manages to do well without any TOP players, are they okay? What if you are outside of a metro and your program is better than the one a district over and you pull kids from there? etc, etc

HShockeywatcher wrote:

Jeffy95 wrote:

dueling21 wrote: So by that logic, we should next be clamoring for all privates (St. Paul Academy, Rochester Lourdes, Providence Academy, Blake, Breck, Minnehaha Academy, Totino-Grace, Legacy Christian, St. Cloud Cathedral), all co-ops with large numbers of schools and /or enrollments (LSHSPTCUC, Minneapolis, Morris-Benson, New Ulm, Windom, St. Paul Johnson, Moose Lake, MAML, Prairie Centre, River Lakes, Wadena-Deer Creek, Northern Lakes, North Shore, etc.), and all traditionally strong programs that draw in kids (Warroad, East Grand Forks, Thief River Falls, Hibbing, Hermantown, Mahtomedi, Mankato West, etc.).

There ain't a whole lot left to form a Class A field...

No, that's not even close to what I said. I said if you pull in TOP players from a METRO area. Hermantown and Breck are the only two on your list that fit that LOGIC. Those are also the two that I mentioned. I realize that some of those other privates are in the Twin Cities Metro, but they are hardly destination schools for hockey players.

I said nothing about co-ops. Teams co-op to survive, not to dominate a sport.

So, where do you draw the line? Should ever metro school be AA then since in an ideal world you should be attracting students from all over? When are private schools allowed to stay in Class A based on this model? Why do we assume that private schools (or any school really) are pulling from more than the student population of their school? Or are you really results oriented only? If a school manages to do well without any TOP players, are they okay? What if you are outside of a metro and your program is better than the one a district over and you pull kids from there? etc, etc

If the cutoff is 1200, stick with it! No exceptions! If you want a strong program, build it!

AA privates all in one section and do the same in class A.

MrBoDangles wrote:

HShockeywatcher wrote:So...like I said...you are using more than enrollment and the reason for co-oping. If Monticello is a Class A team enrollment wise (they are), then why would adding schools that have added 7 and 18 players to their youth program be the reason to tip the sales?

7 + 18 = 25

Many of these 5A associations only have 50 - 100 boy skaters in their association.. Do you comprehend how senseless your comment is now?

End

HShockeywatcher wrote:

Jeffy95 wrote:

dueling21 wrote: So by that logic, we should next be clamoring for all privates (St. Paul Academy, Rochester Lourdes, Providence Academy, Blake, Breck, Minnehaha Academy, Totino-Grace, Legacy Christian, St. Cloud Cathedral), all co-ops with large numbers of schools and /or enrollments (LSHSPTCUC, Minneapolis, Morris-Benson, New Ulm, Windom, St. Paul Johnson, Moose Lake, MAML, Prairie Centre, River Lakes, Wadena-Deer Creek, Northern Lakes, North Shore, etc.), and all traditionally strong programs that draw in kids (Warroad, East Grand Forks, Thief River Falls, Hibbing, Hermantown, Mahtomedi, Mankato West, etc.).

There ain't a whole lot left to form a Class A field...

No, that's not even close to what I said. I said if you pull in TOP players from a METRO area. Hermantown and Breck are the only two on your list that fit that LOGIC. Those are also the two that I mentioned. I realize that some of those other privates are in the Twin Cities Metro, but they are hardly destination schools for hockey players.

I said nothing about co-ops. Teams co-op to survive, not to dominate a sport.

So, where do you draw the line? Should ever metro school be AA then since in an ideal world you should be attracting students from all over? When are private schools allowed to stay in Class A based on this model? Why do we assume that private schools (or any school really) are pulling from more than the student population of their school? Or are you really results oriented only? If a school manages to do well without any TOP players, are they okay? What if you are outside of a metro and your program is better than the one a district over and you pull kids from there? etc, etc

"All I know is never bet on the white guy."

Lt. Frank Drebin
Police Squad

You can't just build it, economics play too major of a roll. I agree with hswatcher to a degree on this. Where privates lose their credibility, in hockey at least, is catholic kids from Brooklyn Center are not playing hockey.

goldy313 wrote:You can't just build it, economics play too major of a roll. I agree with hswatcher to a degree on this. Where privates lose their credibility, in hockey at least, is catholic kids from Brooklyn Center are not playing hockey.

I suppose you are right.. The soup lines are long in Monticello..

I think my issue with this coop is we have two programs who are struggling, and it's great that their kids have a place to play, but the 3rd program seems pretty competitive and could probably compete on their own.
So I think we have different interests between the coop. Maple lake and Annadale are looking for a place for their kids to play while Monticello wants to win.
Like Eliott said, it's okay to want to win, but then it makes me wonder how many kids from the other two programs are making the team. If most of the kids from Annadale and Maple Lake are getting cut because Monticello has better kids, what is the point of the Coop?
I mean, I have no idea how many players from each program are on the team, but I would imagine most are from Monticello, and I'm guessing having only one or two kids make te team is not why ML or Annadale joined the coop.

What to do with Minneapolis and their combined enrollment approaching 6000 kids. Damn them for playing in single A.

Corn Cobb wrote:What to do with Minneapolis and their combined enrollment approaching 6000 kids. Damn them for playing in single A.

I guess with the name 'Corn Cobb' I can't blame you for not seeing the glaring differences between the two Co-ops

green4 wrote:

Corn Cobb wrote:What to do with Minneapolis and their combined enrollment approaching 6000 kids. Damn them for playing in single A.

I guess with the name 'Corn Cobb' I can't blame you for not seeing the glaring differences between the two Co-ops

Great insight, Cake-eater

HShockeywatcher wrote:

MrBoDangles wrote:A real down on their luck case.. Fancy high school, obviously great tax base, solid AA type enrollment and they simply did a poor job of building a strong program!! Then award them with moving down where they're an instant favorite and have no similarities to their competition..

Their enrollment alone puts them in Class A though; that's the point.

I'm not downplaying anything. I'm merely asking questions, which you still haven't answered. I have no idea how many players are in the entire associations of any programs in the state, let alone the one in question...

MNHockeyFan wrote:

Jeffy95 wrote:There have been three teams complained about in the last six years. STA, because they are a Metro Private. Hermantown, because they are in a Metro area and get a HUGE amount of the top players from the surrounding Associations and School Districts. And Breck, again because they are a Metro Private.

But all three were Class A by virtue of their enrollment. And nobody would have complained if they weren't good.

ding ding ding, we have a winner. No one cared when STA won 10 games in 3 seasons, but when they did things that public school programs are completely capable of doing, they are suddenly "too good for Class A." I think AA is the right place for STA and wish they would've moved up sooner, but the hypocrisy from so many is astonishing. When I've talked to people from other states people are amazed whenn I've mentioned teams changing classes; I've mentioned many examples of teams nationwide who are the best team in their state, and sometimes the nation, who aren't even in their state's top class. I've also brought up numerous ways of re-figuring classification that achieves private haters goals and more. Oh well...

Yeah, I know.

Just the other day, I was thinking "Gee, if only Hallock, Crookston, Park Rapids et al knew they had the capability".

MrBoDangles wrote:

MrBoDangles wrote:

HShockeywatcher wrote:So...like I said...you are using more than enrollment and the reason for co-oping. If Monticello is a Class A team enrollment wise (they are), then why would adding schools that have added 7 and 18 players to their youth program be the reason to tip the sales?

7 + 18 = 25

Many of these 5A associations only have 50 - 100 boy skaters in their association.. Do you comprehend how senseless your comment is now?

End

What point are you trying to make by quoting yourself? This doesn't provide any context for Monticello or the class they are in now...

green4 wrote:I think my issue with this coop is we have two programs who are struggling, and it's great that their kids have a place to play, but the 3rd program seems pretty competitive and could probably compete on their own.
So I think we have different interests between the coop. Maple lake and Annadale are looking for a place for their kids to play while Monticello wants to win.
Like Eliott said, it's okay to want to win, but then it makes me wonder how many kids from the other two programs are making the team. If most of the kids from Annadale and Maple Lake are getting cut because Monticello has better kids, what is the point of the Coop?
I mean, I have no idea how many players from each program are on the team, but I would imagine most are from Monticello, and I'm guessing having only one or two kids make te team is not why ML or Annadale joined the coop.

Without the co-op, though, Monticello would be a Class A school.

Okay, so if you end up with the situation where it's the reverse of what you're saying, that half of the varsity is from ML/Annandale and all the bad players are from Monticello, but ML/Annandale don't have the numbers to field a team, wouldn't that still be reason for them to be a Class A school? What part of this, in your mind, puts them in AA?

zamboniexhaustinhaler wrote:

HShockeywatcher wrote:

MrBoDangles wrote:A real down on their luck case.. Fancy high school, obviously great tax base, solid AA type enrollment and they simply did a poor job of building a strong program!! Then award them with moving down where they're an instant favorite and have no similarities to their competition..

Their enrollment alone puts them in Class A though; that's the point.

I'm not downplaying anything. I'm merely asking questions, which you still haven't answered. I have no idea how many players are in the entire associations of any programs in the state, let alone the one in question...

MNHockeyFan wrote: But all three were Class A by virtue of their enrollment. And nobody would have complained if they weren't good.

ding ding ding, we have a winner. No one cared when STA won 10 games in 3 seasons, but when they did things that public school programs are completely capable of doing, they are suddenly "too good for Class A." I think AA is the right place for STA and wish they would've moved up sooner, but the hypocrisy from so many is astonishing. When I've talked to people from other states people are amazed whenn I've mentioned teams changing classes; I've mentioned many examples of teams nationwide who are the best team in their state, and sometimes the nation, who aren't even in their state's top class. I've also brought up numerous ways of re-figuring classification that achieves private haters goals and more. Oh well...

Yeah, I know.

Just the other day, I was thinking "Gee, if only Hallock, Crookston, Park Rapids et al knew they had the capability".

Clearly metro A schools are different than outstate A schools. But hiring a new coach, building a hockey rink, bettering your program so students from neighboring cities choose to come play for you aren't things unique to private schools.

HShockeywatcher wrote:

MrBoDangles wrote:

MrBoDangles wrote: 7 + 18 = 25

Many of these 5A associations only have 50 - 100 boy skaters in their association.. Do you comprehend how senseless your comment is now?

End

What point are you trying to make by quoting yourself? This doesn't provide any context for Monticello or the class they are in now...

green4 wrote:I think my issue with this coop is we have two programs who are struggling, and it's great that their kids have a place to play, but the 3rd program seems pretty competitive and could probably compete on their own.
So I think we have different interests between the coop. Maple lake and Annadale are looking for a place for their kids to play while Monticello wants to win.
Like Eliott said, it's okay to want to win, but then it makes me wonder how many kids from the other two programs are making the team. If most of the kids from Annadale and Maple Lake are getting cut because Monticello has better kids, what is the point of the Coop?
I mean, I have no idea how many players from each program are on the team, but I would imagine most are from Monticello, and I'm guessing having only one or two kids make te team is not why ML or Annadale joined the coop.

Without the co-op, though, Monticello would be a Class A school.

Okay, so if you end up with the situation where it's the reverse of what you're saying, that half of the varsity is from ML/Annandale and all the bad players are from Monticello, but ML/Annandale don't have the numbers to field a team, wouldn't that still be reason for them to be a Class A school? What part of this, in your mind, puts them in AA?

zamboniexhaustinhaler wrote:

HShockeywatcher wrote:Their enrollment alone puts them in Class A though; that's the point.

I'm not downplaying anything. I'm merely asking questions, which you still haven't answered. I have no idea how many players are in the entire associations of any programs in the state, let alone the one in question... ding ding ding, we have a winner. No one cared when STA won 10 games in 3 seasons, but when they did things that public school programs are completely capable of doing, they are suddenly "too good for Class A." I think AA is the right place for STA and wish they would've moved up sooner, but the hypocrisy from so many is astonishing. When I've talked to people from other states people are amazed whenn I've mentioned teams changing classes; I've mentioned many examples of teams nationwide who are the best team in their state, and sometimes the nation, who aren't even in their state's top class. I've also brought up numerous ways of re-figuring classification that achieves private haters goals and more. Oh well...

Yeah, I know.

Just the other day, I was thinking "Gee, if only Hallock, Crookston, Park Rapids et al knew they had the capability".

Clearly metro A schools are different than outstate A schools. But hiring a new coach, building a hockey rink, bettering your program so students from neighboring cities choose to come play for you aren't things unique to private schools.

Agreed.

In the metro area.

But then, since all transfers are for "the better education" anyway, a new coach, rink, etc. may not matter much.

HShockeywatcher wrote:

green4 wrote:I think my issue with this coop is we have two programs who are struggling, and it's great that their kids have a place to play, but the 3rd program seems pretty competitive and could probably compete on their own.
So I think we have different interests between the coop. Maple lake and Annadale are looking for a place for their kids to play while Monticello wants to win.
Like Eliott said, it's okay to want to win, but then it makes me wonder how many kids from the other two programs are making the team. If most of the kids from Annadale and Maple Lake are getting cut because Monticello has better kids, what is the point of the Coop?
I mean, I have no idea how many players from each program are on the team, but I would imagine most are from Monticello, and I'm guessing having only one or two kids make te team is not why ML or Annadale joined the coop.

Without the co-op, though, Monticello would be a Class A school.

Okay, so if you end up with the situation where it's the reverse of what you're saying, that half of the varsity is from ML/Annandale and all the bad players are from Monticello, but ML/Annandale don't have the numbers to field a team, wouldn't that still be reason for them to be a Class A school? What part of this, in your mind, puts them in AA?

I think you are assuming too much. I literally never said that they belong in AA nor do I think that. They can stay in single A all they want, I don't care, that is literally the part I care the least about.

My issue is more with ethics than anything. I think the point of a co-op is because the programs are struggling so much that they can't put forth a team, so they combined so everyone has a chance to play. But in this example, the co-op includes a team/town that doesn;t exactly need the help of anyone else. So the way I see it is that Monticello just gets to grab the best players from these other two towns and throw them on their team. I think that is unethical.

And maybe I'm wrong, maybe Monticello was the only school willing to form a co-op in the area, but it doesn't seem like the point of the co-op, where it gets kids from the struggling schools a chance to play is being carried out.

Humor me with this example. Mahtomedi is the next closest school in enrollment to Monticello. Lets say instead of RIchfield forming a Co-op with the school they did, they instead formed with Mahtomedi. Now the Zephers have a good hockey team, and Richfield has struggled, how many of the RIchfield kids make that team? Maybe one on varsity and one on JV while the rest get cut? Sure, two kids get to play, but you aren't helping the rest of those kids, why form that Co-op? Why not just make a junior gold team where you can play with only 12 kids?
Not only does it not help most of those Richfield kids in this scenario, but Mahtomedi gets to add a free player or two to make them that much better while the rest of the kids watch from the sidelines. I don't know, I guess I just find that a bit unethical to benefit from the system instead of helping the program out.

Seems like people are assuming that Annandale, Maple Lake and Monticello were 3 separate hockey communities that formed a co-op to be stronger.

I can't find the history on the internet, but Monticello is the only community with an indoor rink. Perhaps the co-op started with some Annandale/Maple Lake kids who wanted to play high school hockey, but did not want to open enroll to Monticello?

So, I don't think this is a case of "let's merge programs to get more wins". This is common around the state. If MSHSL did not consider allowing some co-ops to move down, would the anchor school (Monticello, Rocori, etc) vacate the co-ops and possibly leave some kids out in the cold? Why add 900+ kids to your enrollment classification for a handful of players.

I totally get why some people are upset that they were moved down to Class A. I don't agree with it, but I understand the reasons behind the angst. I do not understand in anyway why people are upset with Monticello for forming the co-op.

When did this co-op start? Monticello has a Class A enrollment and has been in AA for as long as I can remember (which admittedly isn't that long). So it would appear that they have been in AA for years and after not winning a section quarterfinal game for something like 20 years (that may be wrong, it was a quote) they petitioned to move down. It's possible the stars aligned with an influx of good players, but they had a losing record last year so I'm not really sure that's a great conclusion in a vacuum.

green4 wrote:I think you are assuming too much. I literally never said that they belong in AA nor do I think that. They can stay in single A all they want, I don't care, that is literally the part I care the least about.

More than anything, I'm trying to say we don't have enough information to draw any conclusions. Co-ops are formed for all sorts of reasons and are evaluated on a case by case basis.

You do make some valid points, though. I suspect in that case it may make sense to co-op and start a junior gold team. While the other programs may not add a lot of varsity depth, it may be something that makes having a team a possibility for all involved. But again, we don't know.

zooomx wrote: So, I don't think this is a case of "let's merge programs to get more wins". This is common around the state. If MSHSL did not consider allowing some co-ops to move down, would the anchor school (Monticello, Rocori, etc) vacate the co-ops and possibly leave some kids out in the cold? Why add 900+ kids to your enrollment classification for a handful of players.

I totally get why some people are upset that they were moved down to Class A. I don't agree with it, but I understand the reasons behind the angst. I do not understand in anyway why people are upset with Monticello for forming the co-op.

Lets see if I can summerize ...

I don't think people are upset for forming a co-op I think it has to do with playing AA for years after the co-op started THEN petitioning to move down because they didn't do as well as they wanted in a section games even though there are MANY other teams that don't do as well in sections as they wanted ... in direct contrast to the "everyone gets a ribbon" beliefs. In addition they petitioned to move down at a time when their upper youth teams ( bantams) were successful and, apparently recruited some players from outside the area. Strikes many as chasing trophies rather than playing at at AA where you are assigned based on rules many other are following.

silentbutdeadly3139 wrote:

zooomx wrote: So, I don't think this is a case of "let's merge programs to get more wins". This is common around the state. If MSHSL did not consider allowing some co-ops to move down, would the anchor school (Monticello, Rocori, etc) vacate the co-ops and possibly leave some kids out in the cold? Why add 900+ kids to your enrollment classification for a handful of players.

I totally get why some people are upset that they were moved down to Class A. I don't agree with it, but I understand the reasons behind the angst. I do not understand in anyway why people are upset with Monticello for forming the co-op.

Lets see if I can summerize ...

I don't think people are upset for forming a co-op I think it has to do with playing AA for years after the co-op started THEN petitioning to move down because they didn't do as well as they wanted in a section games even though there are MANY other teams that don't do as well in sections as they wanted ... in direct contrast to the "everyone gets a ribbon" beliefs. In addition they petitioned to move down at a time when their upper youth teams ( bantams) were successful and, apparently recruited some players from outside the area. Strikes many as chasing trophies rather than playing at at AA where you are assigned based on rules many other are following.

Exactly.. Pure common sense..

Princeton (900 students) had a co op with Milaca (450) students a few years back and had to play in 7AA. They eventually had to drop the co op to be allowed to plain in A

MAML 1900 students

Princeton - Milaca had 1350 students



I bet some in the Princeton program would love the boost of another 800 students from Annandale - Maple Lake and still play A.. But they obviously don't have the same pull with the decision makers..

Someone should probably explain this to all the past Princeton and Milaca kids how this worked out..

Looks like a good choice after last nights game now doesn't it.

MrBoDangles wrote:Princeton (900 students) had a co op with Milaca (450) students a few years back and had to play in 7AA. They eventually had to drop the co op to be allowed to plain in A

MAML 1900 students

Princeton - Milaca had 1350 students



I bet some in the Princeton program would love the boost of another 800 students from Annandale - Maple Lake and still play A.. But they obviously don't have the same pull with the decision makers..

Someone should probably explain this to all the past Princeton and Milaca kids how this worked out..

Starting to sound like you're from Princeton and don't like the competition. But you're totally right. Let's get these elite players from MAML playing back in 8AA. Maybe we can get another 27-0 section score like we had when they were playing in that class and section. (2005?)

Driven through Maple Lake lately? They aren't having hockey on their own. Annandale is nearly as unlikely. Dassel-Cokato is already co-op with Litchfield who plays in 3A. Where do you recommend Annandale and Maple Lake go? Monticello clearly does not have hockey enrollment numbers to compete with anyone in 8AA. LSH/SP/TCU has enrollment numbers of around 1,300. Perhaps we should get a thread going protesting them, they are in 1A.

GoldyGopher wrote:

MrBoDangles wrote:Princeton (900 students) had a co op with Milaca (450) students a few years back and had to play in 7AA. They eventually had to drop the co op to be allowed to plain in A

MAML 1900 students

Princeton - Milaca had 1350 students



I bet some in the Princeton program would love the boost of another 800 students from Annandale - Maple Lake and still play A.. But they obviously don't have the same pull with the decision makers..

Someone should probably explain this to all the past Princeton and Milaca kids how this worked out..

Starting to sound like you're from Princeton and don't like the competition. But you're totally right. Let's get these elite players from MAML playing back in 8AA. Maybe we can get another 27-0 section score like we had when they were playing in that class and section. (2005?)

Driven through Maple Lake lately? They aren't having hockey on their own. Annandale is nearly as unlikely. Dassel-Cokato is already co-op with Litchfield who plays in 3A. Where do you recommend Annandale and Maple Lake go? Monticello clearly does not have hockey enrollment numbers to compete with anyone in 8AA. LSH/SP/TCU has enrollment numbers of around 1,300. Perhaps we should get a thread going protesting them, they are in 1A.

MAML 3
Buffalo 2

MrBoDangles wrote:MAML 3
Buffalo 2

NSP 3 - SSP 4; small schools beat big schools all the time, what's your point?

GoldyGopher and others have asked some questions that you're ignoring. Getting your answers to those would be productive...

MrBoDangles wrote:

GoldyGopher wrote:

MrBoDangles wrote:Princeton (900 students) had a co op with Milaca (450) students a few years back and had to play in 7AA. They eventually had to drop the co op to be allowed to plain in A

MAML 1900 students

Princeton - Milaca had 1350 students



I bet some in the Princeton program would love the boost of another 800 students from Annandale - Maple Lake and still play A.. But they obviously don't have the same pull with the decision makers..

Someone should probably explain this to all the past Princeton and Milaca kids how this worked out..

Starting to sound like you're from Princeton and don't like the competition. But you're totally right. Let's get these elite players from MAML playing back in 8AA. Maybe we can get another 27-0 section score like we had when they were playing in that class and section. (2005?)

Driven through Maple Lake lately? They aren't having hockey on their own. Annandale is nearly as unlikely. Dassel-Cokato is already co-op with Litchfield who plays in 3A. Where do you recommend Annandale and Maple Lake go? Monticello clearly does not have hockey enrollment numbers to compete with anyone in 8AA. LSH/SP/TCU has enrollment numbers of around 1,300. Perhaps we should get a thread going protesting them, they are in 1A.

MAML 3
Buffalo 2

From Tuesday...

St. Michael 10
MAML 2

See, I can post scores too.